?:if^: 




THE 

CELEBRATED 

Controversial Discussion 

BETWEEN 

THE REV. THOMAS MAGUIRE 

AND 

THE REV. RICHARD T. P. POPE, 

WHICH TOOK PLACE AT THE 

LECTURE-ROOM OF THE DUBLIN INSTITUTION, 

WHERE O'CONNELL AND OTHERS PRESIDED. 



A. FULL, COMPLETE, AND AUTHENTIC REPORT. 




NEW YORK : 
D. & J. SADLIER & CO., 31 BARCLAY STREET. 

MONTREAL ; 

275 Notre-Dame Street. 



Th8 Library 
OP C&NeREss 

WASHINGTON 






Copyright, 
D. & J. SADLIER & CO. 




INTRODUCTION. 



As introductory to the Report of the important ContioversiaJ 
Diseiission between the Rev. Messrs. Pope and Maguire, we 
feel It our duty to lay before the Public the arrangements which 
preceded the meetings for the above object. 

A meeting was held on Wednesday, the 11th of April, 1827, 
at the house of Mr. Tims, in Grafton street, at which Messrs. 
Pope and Maguire were present ; when it was resolved, that as 
the points about to be discussed equally affected the Protestant 
and Roman Catholic Churches, so there should be an equality 
ill every particular, in order that the public, on the after consid- 
eration, might be satisfied that the Discussion had been conducted 
in the most impartial manner, and entered upon with the spirit of 
kindness and mutual good feeling. 

After several meetings, in which we have the gratification to 
SJiy, every disposition was evinced on both sides to act with 
liberality and candor, while at the same time principle was upheld 
with uncompromismg steadiness, the Reverend Gentlemen having 
finally settled the points for discussion, and the undersigned 
definitely and with their entire approbation, having arranged the 
preliminaries, the day of meeting was fixed jor the 19th day ol 
\pril. From the impossibility of procuring the Rotunda for six 
su**cessive days, (the shortest time the discussion could last,) 
,ind no more spacious or equally commodious place for meeting 
pipsentmg itself, the Lecture-room of the Dublin Institution, 
Sackville street, was taken ; and in the result manifested that, as 
to situation, necessity bad compelled, what judgment ultimately 
apnraved 



4 INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT. 

The preliminaries entered into were as follows . 

I. 

irrangonent agreed upon for the proposed discussion between tk^ 
Rev. Mr. Pope and the Rev. Mr, Maguire, April 12, 1827. 

L The Discussion to commence on Thursday, the 19th 
ihBtant, and continue from day to day until closed. 

II. The Meetings to be presided over by two Chairmen on« 
Protestant and one Roman CathoUc. 

III. The business to commence each day at eleven o'clock^ 
kuid to close at three, with the exception of the first day, which 
will close at four o'clock. 

IV. The Discussion to be limited to three points by each 
party, viz : 

MR. POPE. 

1st, Infallibility; 2d, Purgatory; 3d, Transubstantiatiwi. 
MR. MAGUIRE. 

1st, The divine right of private judgment to prcnounce upon 
the authenticity^ integrity^ and canonicity^ of ScriptiJie, and 
to determine its meaning in articles of faith. 

2d, The justification of the Reformation. 

3d, The Protestant Churches do not possess that unity whiiii 
forms the distinctive mark of the true Church of Chiist 

V. The points to be discussed in the following order; 

1st day, - - - Mr. Pope, 1st point. 

2d do. - - - Mr. Maguire, do. 

3d do. ... Mr. Pope, 2d point. 

4th do. - - - Mr. Maguire, do. 

5th do. - - - Mr. Pope, 3d point. 

6th do. - - - Mr. Maguire, do. 

VI. Not more than one pomt to be spoken to at a tmie. 

VII. No new point to be spoken to by either party, until the 
pomt under consideration is fully and finally closed. 

VIII. The speeches and replies to be limited to half an hour 
%nd each point to occupy but one day at the utmost. 

N. B. The number of minutes which may be lost before the 
beginning of each day's discussion, to be added to the 
period of closing the business of the day. 

IX. Admission to be by tickets only, for which shall be charged 
the sum of , the surplus of money so collected, aft^r 
defraying all the expenses attending the Discussion, to be handed 
over to the Mendicity. 

X. The Meeting to be open to the Press, but a special 
Reporter for each party to be employed, who shall be responsible 



INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT. O 

for the accuracy of the reports that shall be made of the speeches. 
Biid entire business of the discussion.* 

XL Two door-keepers to be provided, one Roman Catholic 
aiul one Protestant. 

XII. No indication to be admHted of approbation or disappro- 
bation. 

XIII. The authorised copy of the speeches to be authenticated 
by the signatures of the Rev. Mr. Pope, and Rev. Mr. Maguire 

T. Maguire, P. M. Singer, 

Richard T. P. Pope, John Lawless. 

II. 

Further Preliminary Regulations for the Proceedings of the Meeting 
of the Rev. Mr, Pope, and Rev. Mr. Maguire, agreed to by the 
undersigned, on the part of the above Gentlemen respectively. 
L No person whatever to be permitted to address the aieeiing 

but the Rev. Mr. Pope, and Rev. Mr. Maguire. 

II. No part of the auditory to interfere in any way whatever 
with the Rev. Gentlemen above named, or with the subject 
matter of the discussion. 

III. The undersigned to be at liberty to explain any part of 
the preliminary arrangements, if called upon to do so from the 
Chair. 

IV. The Chairmen are requested to prevent any manifestation 
of approbation or disapprobation, and to eni^orce perfect silence 
in the meeting. 

P. iE. Singer, 
Dublin^ \Sth ApriU 1827. John Law^less. 

TIL 

Further Articles of Agreement entered into by the undersigned^ on 
the part of Messrs. Pope and Maguire. 

I. The parties not to exceed four speeches each during any 
one day. Merely calling on the opposite party for proofs not 
to be considered as a speech. 

II. Declining to speak in turn by either party, when it is his 
rotation, or speaking short of the limited period of half an hour, 
ti be considered as one of the four speeches of the day. 

Ill The business of each day to close after each party has 
ifoken, or hai the opportunity of speaking ybwr times, although 
It uhould not have reached the hour of three o'clock ; it being 
hereby again declared that agreeably to the regulations of the 
12th instant, should the discussion reach three o'clock, the 
number of minutes which may have elapsed after eleven o'clock, 
Hhe hour fixed for commencing the discussion on each day) 

♦ The Special Reporters appointed on this occasion were Mr. P. D. HAftDf 
ftnd iVir. J. Sheridan. 

1* 



b iiiiKODUCTORJ^ STATEMENT. 

ehal. be added to the time allotted to the last speaker, on e^ch 
day, so as to complete his half hour, should he desire to continue 
for that time, although such addition shall exceed three o'clock 
by so many minutes. P. I£i. Singer, 

20/A ^pril, 1827. John Lawless. 

The cnairs having been taken, on the morning of the 19th of 
April by Admiral Oliver, as the Protestant, and Daniel 
3'CoNNELL, Esq, as the Roman Catholic Chairman, the latter 
briefly observed, '• That he considered it necessary to state, that 
the Gentlemen who had been appointed to make the preliminary 
arrangements would read the particular rules by which the 
"meeting was to be governed ; and as he felt assured that the 
mere reading of the rules v/ould be quite sufficient to induce 
every gentleman to comply with them, he would not make any 
further observations.'' 

The friend appointed by Mr. Pope having been then called 
upon, the document No. 2, was read, as containing the rule« 
unmediately relating to the meeting. 

The undersigned, in making the foregoing statement, have 
discharged a duty which they felt to be incumbent upon them ; 
and they have to express their gratification, that so important a 
discussion, and one so likely to excite the mind beyond the exact 
limits of discretion, was conducted with becoming zeal, but at 
the same time with good feeling, and a conduct suited to the 
momentous business in hand. They are also equally gratiii»»d, 
that the arrangements which they entered into, were such as ♦o 
give satisfaction to the auditory, and ensure that regularity ar<J 
silence which became the solemnity of the occasion. 

P. M. SINGER, 
JOHN LAWLESS. 



1 certify that the Report of the recent Discussion between Mr. Pope of** 
myself, as published by Messrs. Coyne, Tims, & Curry, is alone ajivherriri 
fcach proof sheet having received ray signature. 
June 14, 1827. THOMAS MAliUlR^S. 

Philip Dixon Hardy, 
James Sheridan. 



1 certify that the Report of the recent Discussion between Mr. Maguin 
Itnd myself, as published by Messrs. Coyne, Tims, & Curry, is alone authentiA 
tach proof sJieet having received my signature. 

/TMf 14, 1827. RICHARD T P. POPB 

James Sheridan, 
Phij.ip Dixon Hardy, 



CONTROVERSIAL DISCUSSION 



First Day.— April 19, 1827. 



SL'BJECT. — The Infallihility of the Roman Catholic Ckutck 

The Chair having been taken by Admiral Oliver and Mr 
O'Connell, and the particular rules, by which the discussion was 
to be governed, read by Mr. Singer. 

The Rev. Mr. Pope rose, and said — Gentlemen, I need 
scarcely remark, that we are assembled here this day, for the 
discussion of the most important subjects which can possibly 
engage the human mind. We are not assembled to debate a 
question relative to the politics of this passing scene — we have 
not come here for the purpose of discussing matters which con- 
cern us merely as the inhabitants of this lower world ; but to 
debate topics of the most vital consequence to us as immortal and 
accountable beings. Let us then, in entering on this momentous 
discussion, divest ourselves of every party feeling, and come to 
the consideration of the subject before us with minds unbiassed 
and unprejudiced. And here it may not be uninteresting to this 
meeting to be put in possession of the circumstances which led 
to the present discussion. While in Longford, in November 
last, I received a letter from an individual, (whom I afterwards 
discovered to be a Roman Catholic of no inconsiderable informa- 
tion) in which it was stated, that I was challenged by a Roman 
Catholic Clergyman to meet him in public, for the purpose of 
discussing the points of difference between the Protestant and 
the Roman Catholic churches ; and that I had then a fair oppor- 
lunity of defending the principles which I maintaiue*^ and of 
exposing in the face of the world, the errors of the church of 
Rome, if any such errors existed. I considered it judicious to 
wait, until the challenge should reach me iii an authentic fonn 
In a day or two afterwards, I saw in the Weekly Register^ of 
the 23d November, an account of an Aggregate Meeting at 
Carrick-on-Shannon, and which contained a speech made bj 
the Re^ . Mr. Maguire^ in which was the following passage :- 



e THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

•* Lev the advoctites of such a system, the Wolffes and the Popea 
of tne day, bring the matter to an issue, and I challenge Wolfft 
or Pope to meet me and answer the question of the Socinian, 
and prove from tike principles of piivate judgnient that he ia 
v/rong ; or if they be able to answer the question in any way 
lut that in which the Catholic church answers it, I will myself 
become a Biblical, and go through the country on the same mis- 
gi >n aF they are on—but they will not, they cannot." 

At a meeting of the Hibernian Society, which took place on 
ihe following Tuesday, I commented on the Socinian question, 
expressed my willingness to meet Mr. Maguire, and requested 
that, if there were any Roman Catholics at the meeting, they 
would convey my answer to Mr. Maguire. Fearing, however, 
that my observations might escape his notice, and being anxious 
that he should not be ignorant of my readiness to meet him, I 
addressed a letter to the Editor of the Roscommon and Leitrim 
Gazette^ which, after treating on the subject of the Socinian 
controversy, concludes thus : — " And now. Sir, in conclusion, 
I beg leave to state, that I am ready to discuss the subject of 
this letter, or the Roman Catholic controversy generally, with 
Mr. Maguire, or any other gentleman, believing that "magna est 
Veritas et prfcvalebit." 

Such, then, gentlemen, was my acceptance of what I con- 
ceived to be a challenge from Mr. Maguire. Some time after, 
a letter appeared in the Weekly Register, from Mr. Maguire, 
in which he gives the following report of a part of his speech 
at Carrick-on-Shannon: — " I there observed,'' he says, " that in 
flippancy of tongue, tortuosity of mind, and sophistry of argu- 
ment, the Bibk-men stood unrivalled; but that were I to meet 
the arch-crusader on the arena of polemical disputation, (and 
this handsome compliment I intended for you) I would confine 
him to a few solid, stubborn objections, of which, if he gave a 
clear logical solution, I myself would become a Biblical, and 
raise my feeble voice in the loud, holy, profitable cry.'' To- 
wards the conclusion of this letter, he grounds a proposal upon 
a concession which I could never grant, pamely, " That the ob- 
jection of the Socinian remains unanswered and unanswerable^ 
(the principle and practice of private interpretation alone consid- 
ered)." His proposal was as follows : — "Should you have the 
manliness to make this necessary admission, which I must insist 
upon as a sine qua non, I shall afford you ampler canvass, and a 
rougher sea, viz : of all the charges which have been, and now 
can be advanced against the doctrines of the Roman Catholic 
church> you shall be at liberty to select whatever three you deem 
most glaring and untenable, whilst I, in my turn, shall bring 
three prime chargejj against the doctrines of your churchf and 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. V 

ftius we shall be both plaintiff and defendant reciprocally." In 
mv next letter to Mr. Maguire, I observed, " It is apparent from 
your own report, that you either did not challenge me, or that 
you have retracted the challenge ; the expression ' were I tc 
meet tlie arch-crusader,' conveying most undoubtedly a very dif- 
fei ^nt meaning from that contained in the words, ' I challenge 
Wulffe or Pope to meet me,' ascribed to you in the Register. 
I here distinctly call upon you either publicly to confess that you 
did not challenge me, or to meet me for public discussion, 'Ftruru 
horum mavis accipe.' I write strongly, but not in the spirit 
of polemical bravado." I shall now rea i to you the concluding 
paragraph of Mr. Maguire's last letter . " I do declare, dis- 
tinctly, that J never did invite you to Sitiva voce disputation ;— 
and I as distinctly declare, that I now accept your challeitge 
and will meet you at the Rotunda, in Dubhn." He says, he 
never did challenge me — you, gentlemen, will judge, whjther 1 
had not reason to consider his speech reported in the Register ^ 
as containing a challenge. I again wrote to Mr. Maguire, and 
^,he result of that correspondence has been, that after an amica- 
ble arrangement of prelimmaries, we are met here this day to 
discuss the various subjects which have been agreed upon ; and 
I most willingly bear testimony to the good feeling which has 
been evinced by my reverend opponent and his friend. 

Permit me to say, gentlemen, that we should hail the appear- 
ance of Mr. Maguire amongst us this day, as exhibiting a 
noble display of independent feeling and judgment. I say, it is a 
noble display of independent feeling — it is manly and bold in 
Mr. Maguire to appear here to advocate his principles ; espe- 
cially as it is well known that the Roman Catholic Primate of 
Ireland has publicly expressed his disapprobation of such a 
proceeding. I say, then, it is manly and bold in him, circum- 
stanced as he is, thus to come forward and claim his privilege, as 
an intellectual and rational being, of thinking and acting foi 
himself. The present meeting is certainly one of a very peculiai 
character, and will doubtless be regarded as a memorable eveni 
in the history of this country. We have on the one hand Dr. 
Curtis, the Titular Primate, expressing his disapprobation of 'he 
proceedings ; but, on the other hand, has the Roman Catholic 
Archbishop of Dublin interfered to prevent Mr. Maguire from 
attending here this day ? or has the Roman Catholic Bishop of 
Mr. Maguire's diocess (Kilmore) taken any notice whatever of 
the extraordinary circumstance of one of the Clergy disobey* 
ing the wishes of the Titular Primate ? Gentlemen, it appears, 
that neither the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dubhn, nor the 
Roman Catholic Bishop of Kilmore has interposed theii 
authority in the business And I do say 'iiat by their siieuce oa 



10 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

Ihe subject they liave given an indirect sanction to the proceed 
ing ; for they possess the power of preventing Mr. Maguire 
from attending, and that power they have not exercjsed. I 
beheve, I am right, in stating that there are some Roman Catho- 
lic Clergymen here this day. I hail their presence amongst ua 
with great satisfaction, as, in my mind, by their attendance, they 
also give their sanction to the proceedings. With respect to 
tile preliminaries, I have one observation to make — it regards 
myself — it is thought by some, that I possess a talent for 
declamatory speaking. Supposing this to be the case, I am by 
tha arrangements which have been entered into, relative to the 
mode in which the discussion is to be conducted, precluded from 
avaihng myself of any advantage which this talent, if I possess 
it, might give me — as it has been agreed upon that neither my 
reverend opponent nor myself shall be allowed to address the 
meeting for longer than half an hour at a time — my soarings 
must be contracted — my pinions must be fettered down. It is 
not by flights of fancy or poetical allusions that this meeting is 
to be swayed — argument is the only weapon that can be wielded 
here this day. We must be governed by the only unerring 
standard, — the word of God. One word to the geiitlemen of 
the public Press — all I ask is justice — justice alike to each of 
us — let our principles and opinions go fairly before the world- 
let the world scrutinize and examine them, and then give its 
verdict — I shall not at present occupy more of your time. 

Mr. Maguire rose, and spoke to the following effect : — Gen- 
tlemen — As my friend, Mr. Pope, has entered into a very long 
narrative, touching the circumstances that have led to the pre- 
sent discussion, it will not be considered egotism in me, if 1 give 
you a brief sketch of them, as far as they regard myself. I 
happened, last November, to come to the town of Carrick-on- 
Shannon, on private business of importance, and I solemnly 
assure you, that I was not aware, until I arrived in Carrick, that a 
nieeting of the Catholics of Leitrim was about to be held there 
I was pressed by a few particular friends to remain for the meet- 
ing which was fixed for the next day ; and on attending at the 
meeting, a resolution on the subject of education was pit into 
my hands to move. In doing so, I prefaced it with a few 
observations, and I distinctly recollect saying, that my great 
objection to the disputations upon the indiscriminate circulation of 
the Scriptures was, that they all ended in a wordy war, and mis- 
erable speechifying. I objected to that course, and I said, that 
on the contrary, solid argument, logical deduction, and elos© 
fighting T»hould be adopted. I went on to say, hat such was the 
course I was determined to pursue ; and that were I (you Mil! 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. II 

observe that my expr(!Ssion was an hypothetical one to meet the 
arch-cr"sader himself, in the arena of polemical dis\ utation, in- 
stead of suffering him to indulge in flights of fancy, which would 
only obscure, or in strains of eloquence that would only confuse, 
I would confine him to a few solid objections, such as thai 
respecting the Socinian, which, if he would satisfactorily solve to 
me, I would myself consent to become a Biblical. You will 
observe that my expression was put hypothetically. I did not 
say that I would meet him, but that were I to meet him, I would 
avoid the flights of fancy and speechifying, and confine him to 
a few solid objections. A report of the observations \\hich 1 
made at this meeting appeared in the Weekly Register, and 
I was there made to say that I was ready to meet the Popes, 
&c, &c. I can assure this assembly, that no such expression 
as that fell from me on that occasion. A newspaper controversy, 
the necessary consequence of a misrepresentation on the 
part of Mr. Pope, ensued. Mr. Pope addressed a long letter 
to me, through the columns of the Evening JSlaiL In that 
letter he attempted to solve the objection with regard to the 
Socinian. I replied, to show that he had not solved that question ; 
and I trust, before this polemical conflict is over, to prove to you 
that he has not solved it, and that he never will. With regard 
to what he has said about the Roman Catholic Primate of Ire- 
land, it would have been more dignified in Mr. Pope to be silen 
t*n that point. — I avoided hearing or seeing any thing from my 
own Bishop, Dr. O'Reilly. Since I came to Dublin, I have 
not received any communication from him, verbal or written. — 
If I have thus come forward in this public place, and on this 
solomn occasion, I have not done so until I have been repeatedly 
challenged tu the conflict. A number of persons were hired, I 
Know not by whom, and sent round my parish with green bags 
containing copies of the challenge, which thev circulated most 
mdusuiously in every possible direction, 'x'he challenge was 
put into every cabin, it was posted upon eve:y wall in the county, 
I state these circumstances to you, as they will form with 
you some excuse for the appearance here this day of a man who 
bas lived amidst the bogs of Leitrim — a man who has been the 
inhabitant of the mountains, and who never before addressed an 
enlightened audience like the present. It must appear to you 
from th's relation of facts, that it was no overweening desire of 
notoriety that pressed me forward. Over me Dr. Curtis and 
Dr Murray exercise no direct control ; and I trust that, in hold- 
mg a conversation in this public room, I do not involve myself 
in a breach of clerical jurisdiction, i am well aware that the 
Roman Catholic Bishops of Ireland never will recognize the 
prill' iple of public discussions upon matters of religion in thl*^ 



12 THE IMWLLIBILITY OF 

country— disturbed as it is by moral, polemical, and political diP 
ferences and coriflict>j. I disclaim, I deny, with uplifted arms, 
any thing like an indirect sanction of these proceedings on the 
part of the Catholic Prelates as mentioned by Mr. Pope. I stand 
forward here, of myself, to defend my religious principles, which 
have grown with my growth, and for the assertion of which I 
am ready if called upon, to lay down my life. These princi- 
ples I anr determined to maintain, unless indeed Mr. Pope shaH 
convince me that I am in error. If I be convinced that I ant 
in error, I am ready to change my religious opinions, and to 
adopt whatever creed reason might in that case point out as pre- 
ferable to my own. Having stated so much with respect to the 
challenge, I have a few words to say with respect to Dr. Cur- 
tis. It may not be inappropriate here to remark, that though I 
am independent of the control of Dr. Curtis, the Roman Catholic 
Primate of all Ireland, I am ready to listen to any advice 
emanating from him, with respect and dutiful attention. 1 am 
well aware that obedience is one of the great and principal duties 
of the Christian — I know, as the Apostle has it, that he who 
refuses to obey the authorities set over him by Divine Provi- 
dence resisteththe ordinances of God, and procureth to himself 
damnation. I would not, therefoie, disobey my superiors, as, in 
doing so, I would be guilty of a violation of moral principle. It 
may not be out of place for me to mention to you the personal 
disadvantages under which I labor on the present occasion. Mr. 
Pope is an old practitioner in the business of disputation. He 
has become, by habit, eloquent on the subject, and he has a fatal 
facility of expressing himself, sufficient to make any cause in 
his hands appear plausible. His system has all the charms of 
novelty to recommend it — and fashion, we all know, is a formid- 
able temptation. He has arrayed in his favor worldly power 
and influence. He has, besides, all the saints and sinners o 
modern times, whose pride and self-interest will secure birr 
attentive ears. He knows how to estimate the value of such 
influence. I do not mean to say that it has any weight with hini 
in t^e assertion of his religious principles. I solemnly declare 
thai I givo him. credit for sincerity. But I have one complaint, 
and a serious (>ne, to make against him. He has left m.e little 
or no ground for attack. I could not obtain from Mi. Pope, 
without difficulty, a profession of his creed, ^^'hen called upon 
to deiine his tailh, he has called himself a Protestant. Mr. Pope 
protests against the church of England — so do I. He protests 
against the church of Scotland — so do I. Against the church 
in Germany — so do I. Against the Greek church — so do I. 
Mr. Pope, in fact protests against every church, but, in a more 
especial and particular manner, does he protect against th« 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 13 

^errors" of Popery ; and if any errors do exist in Popery, I am 
ready lo protest as strongly against thenn as i r. Pope. So far 
I am equally a Protestant with Mr. Pope, and my Protestantism 
g:)es as tar as his, consistmg, as it does, in a simple negation of 
Popery, if it be understood in the sense in which Mr. Pope 
-^ould exhibit it. On the other hand, Mr. Pope has the whole 
.:ge of Roman Catholicism, whence to select three favorite- 
charges against my known and established principles. Wher? 
ire the points which I am to select against him "I In the confes- 
sion of faith which he made to me, he admitted the doctrines of 
tha Trinity, the Incarnation and Justification, by Faith only. 
Now there is not one of those principles which I do not admit 
except the word " only." So far it is difficult for me to selec; 
three principal charges against him. It is true that Mr. Pope 
<ias volunteered to defend two points which he does not entireh 
and undoubtedly believe, but which he has the kindness to sup 
port against me. I have a few preliminary observations to offer 
to you regarding the scriptural proofs of the existence of an 
infallible church. Mr. Pope is not the advocate of any church. 
1 avow myself the child and champion of an infallible church. 
It remains for you to see whether the motives of credibility 
which attach me to that church are defensible — it remains foi 
you to judge w^hether the doctrine, that Christ established a 
church upon earth, and endowed it with infallibility, be grounded 
upon scripture — be consistent with the primitive faith of Chris- 
tianity — be agreeable to common reason and common sense. l\ 
is ftasy to perceive, that he who denies the necessity of bending 
to a spiritual authority, is establishing a principle latitudinarian 
and revolutionary in the strictest sense of the words. If there 
exist no spiritual luthority upon earth, to which man is to yield 
obedience, I assert that every act of rebellion against the church 
and against the state is the admitted and unqualified rignt of 
every inoividual. If the principle of private judgment be founded 
upon the law of nature, or upon the positive law of God, 
there can be no limitation of the right. The law has made no 
exception, consequently every individual has a right (and there 
is no exception, either in religious or political matters) to set up 
his private judgment against the laws of the church and of the 
community. It was such principles that caused t! revclutioR 
in England, and brought a king to the block. To M..iilur prin- 
cipies we are to attribute the bloody scenes of the desolating 
revolution m France. Such principles have involved Germany 
in the darl:est Atheism. I nold in my hand the w^ork ^f the 
Rev. Mr. Rose, dedicated to the Bishop of Chester, in ^hich 
he laments the state of the churches in Germany, with the 
pathos of a Jerem> — he describes them as plunged in the darkesi 



U THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

Atheism. Every thing in the scripture is explained away ther©, 
and the test of natural philosophy is absurdly applied to the mira- 
i^les of our Redeemer. If the principle of private judgment be 
once recognized, then had the heretics of former days, Arius, 
Cerinthus, Manicheus, &c, as good a right to the exercise of 
private judgment as Mr. Pope, or any gentleman of the 19th 
century. ][ those heretics had a right to exercise it, upon what 
principle did the Catholic church condemn them — cut them off 
53 rotten members, and treat them, as Christ said those shall be 
jreated who would not hear the church, as heathens and pub- 
licans, and reprobates upon the earth? Mr. Pope, I suppose, 
recognizes the first four councils, and the Athanasian creed — he 
must then admit that the church had a right to condemn Arius, 
Eutyches, and Manicheus, and every other heretic and heresy 
that appeared for the first four centuries of the Christian aera. 
If he acknowledged the power in the church to condemn heresy 
in the first century, why not acknowledge it now ? Gentlemen, 
I am about to enter upon my proofs of the authority of the Catho- 
lic church. Mr. Pope's rules of faith will be amply discussed 
hereafter, but now you are about to hear, what, to some of you 
may appear the antiquated doctrine of church authority, which 
hos been discarded by modern Reformers for the last 300 years. 

Mr. Pope. — I beg to call upon Mr. Maguire for proofs of 
the Infallibihty of the Church of Rome. 

Mr. Maguire. — I shall make a few preHminary observation? 
before I directly enter upon the subject. If t e unlimited righ^ 
of private judgment be recognised, then wdll a seven-fold shield 
be thrown over every error, however impure — every heresy, 
however damnable — every folly, however ridiculous. It will be 
the origin of every species of madness, violence, and fanati- 
cism. What will each of the heretics say 1 "I exercise my 
judgment conscientiously and to the best of my ability — I have 
prayed to God that he niight enlighten me with his grace. I 
have taken every means in my power to arrive at the truth, and 
my decided conviction now is that Christ is not the Son of 
God." Thus would Arianism, that heresy which distracted the 
ehurch of Christ, and which, if the protecting influence of tlie 
Almighty had not been extended to his church, would have 
eradicated every Christian principle, and sapped the foundation 
of that heavenly and noble edifice, become justifiable. How 
could Mr. Pope blame the Arian I Mr. Pope would appeal tc 
the scriptures — but in vain he would appeal to the scriptures 
agamst the obstinate Arian or Socinian. They would in reply 
appeal to their conscience — they will sav that they have read 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 15 

the scriptures, ard that they have as good a right to interproi 
their meaning as Mt Pope. Can Mr. P^pe, who recognizes 
the principle of gospel hberty, blame them for their conduct? 
Will he, in this regard, violate that principle which is the boast 
of the Reformation? Who is to judge between Mr. Pope and 
die Socinian or Anan ? God alone can be their judge, and 
ihat not till the soul is separated from the body. Mr. Pope has 
called upon me for proofs of the infallibility of the church of 
Ptome. I beseech you, gentlemen, for the tender mercies of 
God^ as far as in you lies, to divest yourselves of every fettling, 
of every prejudice, of every prepossession in favor of your own 
opinions that have been dear to you, and to weigh in the honest 
balance of sincerity the principles which I shall lay down, and 
wnicn I shall invariably found upon texts of scripture, and upon 
the authority established in the church for the first five ages of 
Christianity. I assure you I do hope, with the blessing of 
heaven, and by the influence of the Holy Ghost, to make some 
converts. ! am serious, believe me. Protestants are not in 
the habit of examining the Roman Catholic rehgion. The very 
name of Popery is sufficient to frighten them — the basilisk does 
not appear half so dangerous in their eyes as Popery. And for 
my part I should not wonder at their thinking so, if Popery 
really were what they have been taught to believe it is. It is 
mcumbent on you then to commence an examination of the 
tenets of the Roman Catholic religion. The first text to which 
I shall refer you, is taken from Isaiah, lix, 21. It is admittet. 
by Protestants, that the inspired writer in this passage spoke of 
the church that was to come. 

" This is my covenant with them, saith the Lord ; my spirit that is in thee, 
and my words that I have put into thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy 
mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's 
s^ed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever." 

But I need not dwell at length upon this text, as I am fur- 
nished with several strong and conclusive texts in the New 
Testament. 

" As the Father has sent me, I also send you," says the Lordj addressmg 
his Apostles. Again — " All power is given to me in heaven and in eartli ; 
go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing in the name of the Fatiier, 
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all 
things whatsoever I have commanded you : and lo ! I am with you all days 
even to the consummation of the world." — MattheiVj xxviii, 18, 19, 20. 

Christ here declares, that the same power given to him by 
t\ie Father he communicates to his Apostles vithout limitation, 
moral or personal, it is a maxim in ethics, Ubi lex non dis- 
tinguit, nee nos distinguere debemus. The Father conferred 
upon Christ infallibiL'ty, and here he directly communicates uli 
bis power to the Apostles, Perhaps it will he said, thai il 



16 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

rested there, and was to cease with the lives of th^ \postlc9 
Christ declares the contra y, for he adds, 

** Lo ! 1 am with you all days, even to the consummation of th^ world." 

Were the Apostles to live for ever, or rather was not thii 
power to be communicated to their representatives on earth 
in whose persons they would morally live for ever? St. Paul 
H iting to Timothy says, 

*' The church ot the living God, is the pillar and the ground of truth."— 

ii. 15. 

Again, our Saviour says, 

" He that heareth you, heareth me, and he that despiseth you, despisetb 
Die, and he that despiseth me, despiseth Him that sent me." — Luke x, 16. 

Also St. John, iv, 6. 

" He that knoweth God, heareth us, he that is not of God, heareth us not, 
oy this we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error." 

Therefore, those who did not hear the Apostles preaching and 
instructing, were branded with the mark of the spirit of error 
In Mark, xvi, 15, 16, we read, 

" He saith unto them, Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel 
to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved j but he 
that believeth not, shall be condemned." 

Is there, I would ask, any thing like a commandment here to 
|ive the scriptures to every m.an, woman, and child, and let 
hem interpret them as they might please ? — No. — But if " he 
will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and 
the publican." 

1 ask you, in the sincerity of your hearts, do you think that 
Christ would thus bind mankind in obedience to an authority, 
which coula lead them into damnable error ? Our Lord says 
emphatically, and without limitation or exception, " he that 
will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and 
the publican." 

This, no doubt, will appear a novel doctrine to many of my 
aearers, who have been taught to recognize no authority m my 
church, and w^ho have long worshipped the idol of private 
judgment. Again we read in Hebrews, xiii, 17, 

" Obey your Prelates, for they watch as being to render an account of 
your souls." 

I am at a loss to discover how the Prelates would be obliged 
iO render an account of our souls if it be not our duty to obey 
them ; but if, on the contrary, w^e may read the scriptures and 
interpret them at our own risk, must it follow in that case, as a 
Decessary consequence, that the Bishops, to whom we ackuow* 



HIE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 17 

ledge no obedit nee, shall be ace )untable for the salvation oi 
our souls 1 
•* Oh ! Israel, Israel, destruction is thy own — thy help is only in nie." 

How can the Bishops be accountable for our souls, if we do 
not make them our spiritual guides'? I could quote twenty 
additional passages from scripture in support of the doctrina 
which I advocate, as — 

•* Ye ai e the light of the world" — " ye are th« salt of the earth" — " wha^ 
•oOYsr ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven," ^c. 

I ask you, in the unaffected sincerity of a Christian heart, if 
Christ did not intend to bind mankind in obedience to hia 
Church, is it not astonishing that he should have put forward in 
80 many and such clear texts of scripture, the authority of that 
church ? I challenge Mr. Pope to show me a single dogma in 
the Christian dispensation more clearly revealed in scripture. 
I affirm that he could not prove the divinity of Christ upon texts 
so clear — that cardinal dogma of Christianity is not established 
upon texts so plain, so natural, and so obvious. The Homilies 
of the church of England tell us that for upwards of 800 years, 
" all Christendom v/as involved in damnable idolatry and 
error." Could Christ himself leave hundreds of millions of 
men for 900 years in error 1 I ask — would he lead us into the 
belief of an infallible church, possessing not nifalUbility ? Hav- 
ing said so much upon the subject of infallibility, let me now 
^ive you the belief of the first ages of the church which are 
admitted by all Protestants, and even by Luther himself to have 
taught the truth, and to have been pure in doctrine. The 
quotations which I shall here make from the Holv^ Fathers will 
go before the learned world — I will tell the page and the book 
m which they will be found — I have myself, in seven instances, 
consulted the originals, and finding them so correct, I can 
vouch for the accuracy of the other quotations. The first 
authority which I shall quote is Irenaeus, a father of the Latin 
church, who lived in the second century. He was by birth a 
Greek, and his work in the original is lost, but a Latin transla** 
tion has been preserved. 

" Things being made thus plain (he is alluding to the derivation of doc- 
trine from the Apostles,) it is not from others that truth is to be sought, 
H'hich is easily learned from the Church, (or in the words of the original — 
quam facile est ab ecclesid sumere,) For to this church (he continues) as 
into a rich repository, the Apostles committed whatever is divine truth ; that 
each one, if so aiclined, might thence draw the drink of life. This is the 
loay of life; all other teachers must be :shunned as thieves and robbers. For 
what ? Should there be any dispute on a point of small moment, must not 
recourse be had to the most ancient churches, where the Apostles resided, 
and from them collect the truth ?" — J Iv. He- es. lib. iii cap, iv, page 20^ 
Ed. Oxoiui. 1702. 

2* 



18 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

And again. "It is a duty to obey the Priests of the t/tw ch — Hs qui u 
tcelesia sunt Presbyteri, obedire oportet — who bold their sncc ssion fi(nn the 
Apostles, and who with that succession, received agreeably to the will of thfl 
Father, the sure pledge of truth, {Charisima veritatis certum;) but as to thoae 
who belong not to that leading succession they may be united, they shoild 
he suspected, either as heretics or schismatics, proudly extolling and pleasing 
themselves, or as hypocrites, actuated by vain glory or the Jove of lucre. 
But they whi) impugn the truth, and excite others to oppose the church of 
God, their fate is with Dathan and Abiron ; while schismatics who riclale 
the church unity — ^wi scindunt et separant unitatem ecclesicn — experience tbt 
punisiment which fell on King Jeroboam." 

My next authority is St. Clement, of Alexandria, Lib. stro* 
matum, Book vii, page 883, Oxford edition. He was a Greek 
Father, and Master of the School of Alexandria. He hved in 
the second century. 

" Those who seek may find the truth, and clearly learn from the scrip- 
tures themselves, in what manner heretics have gone astray, and on the 
contrary, in what manner accurate knowledge and the right doctrine are to be 
found in the true and ancient Church only. He ceases to be faithful to the 
Lord, who revolts against the received doctrines of the Church, to embrace 
the opinions of heretics. Heretics make use, indeed, of the scriptures ; but 
then they use not all the sacred books ; those they use are corrupted, or they 
chiefly urge ambiguous passages. They corrupt those truths which agree 
with the inspired word, and were delivered by the holy Apostles and teachers, 
opposing the divine tradition by human doctrines, that they may establish 
their heresy. — But it is clear from what has been said, that there is only ont 
true Churchy which alone is ancient, and there is but one God and one 
Lord." 

TertuUian, who flourished in the end of the second century, 
and was a citizen of Carthage, in his book De Prescript, cap. 
6, page 331. Edit. Pamelhana, 1662, says, — 

" We are not allowed to mdulge our own humour, nor to choose what 
another has invented. We have the Apostles of our Lord as founders, who 
were not themselves the inventors nor authors of what they left us ; but they 
have faithfully taught the world that doctrine which they received from 
Christ," 

Ibidem, cap. 21. "Now to know what the Apostles taught — that is, what 
Christ revealed to them, recourse must be had to the Churches which they 
founded, and which they instructed by word of mouth, and by their Epistles, 
For it is plain, that all doctrine which is conformable to the faith of thesi» 
mother Churches is true, being that which they received from the Apostles, 
the Apostles from Christ, Christ from God ; and that all other opinions must 
be novel and false.'*^ 

Century the Third. — Origen in his preface to the first 
bock of his Periarchon, page 47, writes, — 

" As there are .nany who think they believe what Christ taught, and some 
of these diifer from others, it becomes necessary that all should profess that 
doctrine, which came down from the Apostles, and now continues in die 
Church {usque ad presens in ecclesia permanens,) That alone is tr^th which 
in nothing differs from what has been thus dehvered. ((^ua %n iwxUsi cJk 
teclesvuMca et apostolica discordat tradiUone,^^) 



THE ROMAN CATHDLIC CHURCH. I* 

And homLy the 6th, on Leviticus : — 

•* Let him look to it, who arrogantly puffed up, contemns the aposCoJic 
words. To me it is good to adhere to apostohc men, as to Grod and hit 
Christ, and to draw intelligence from the Scriptures, according to the sense, 
that has been dehvered by them. If we follow the mere letter of the Scrip- 
tures, and take the interpr'^tation of the law, as the Jews commonly explain 
it, I shall blush to confess that the Lord should give such law. But if the 
law of God be understood as the Church teaches^ then only does it tranactnd 
all human law, and is worthy of him that gave it" 

And again, Tract 29, on Matthew, tome 3, page 864 : 

" As often as heretics produce the canonical Scripture, in which ei ery 
Christian agrees and beUeves, they seem to say, * Lo ! with us is the word 
of truth.' But to them (the heretics) we cannot give credit, nor depart from 
the first and ecclesiastical tradition : we can believe only as the succeeding 
churches of God have delivered." 

I may observe, there is only a translation of Origen's wciks 
ill the Latin remaining, except a few fragments of the original 
Greek. St. Cyprian, bishop and martyr, in his treatise De 
Unitate Ecclesiae, observes : — 

" Men are exposed to error, because they turn not their eyes to the foun- 
tain of truth, nor is the head sought for, nor the doctrine of the heavenly 
Father upheld, which things would any one seriously weigh, no long arguing 
would be necessary. The proof is easy — Christ addresses Peter, * 1 say to 
thee, thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates 
of hell shall not prevail against it.' He that does not hold this unity of the 
Church, can he think that he holds the faith ? He that opposes and with- 
utands the Church, can he trust that he is in the Church ?" — Page 108, ^c.** 

And in his 66th Epistle, page 166, Oxford Edition : — 

"Christ says to his Apostles, and through them to all his ministers, who 
by a regular ordination succeed to them, — * He that heareth you, heareth me, 
and he that despiseth you, despiseth me.' (Luke x. 16.) And thence have 
schisms and heresies arisen, when the bishop who is one, and presides over 
the Church, is proudly despised — Dum Episcopus qui unus est, el Ecclesice 
prcesty contemnitur,^^ 

Century the Fourth. — Lactantius, a convert to the 
Christian religion, the most accomplished scholar of the age, 
and tutor to Crispus, the emperor Constantine's son, and who 
was styled " the Christian Cicero,'' — In the fourth book of his 
Institutions, c. 30, p. 232, Cambridge edition, thus speaks : 

'•*The Catholic Church alone retains the true worship — this is the sourra 
oi iruth — this is the dwelling of faith — this the temple of God, into which h« 
tbU enters not, and from which he that goes out, forfeits the hope of life, and 
W eternal salvation — a spe vitce ac salutis eternoe, alienus esV 

Eusebius of Palestine, in his Prxmium de Eccles* Tkeol 
page 60, Ed. Colon. 1687: 

"To what has been mentioned, I shall add my reasoning on the diviniu 
of our Saviour; but nothing newly invented from myself; nothing From mv 
own closet, nor resting on the opinion of my own s^agacity. I shall d ;live"i 
the uncorrupted doctrine of the Church of God, which once received fron 
tsta and eye witnesses, this chuivch preserves inviolate." 



to THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

St. Athana^jius, Patriarch of Alexandria, first Epist. ad Ser§f^ 
p^ium^p. 676, Ed. Bened. 1698: 

" Let us again consider ftom the earliest period, the tradition, the doctrine, 
and fiiith of the Cathohc church which God first delivered, which the Apostlei 
proclaimed, and the succeeding Fathers fostered and preserved. On thes6 
authoiitios the church is founded, and whoever falls from her communion 
neithof is, nor can be called a Christian." 

Epist. ad Marcell, 9 1, p. 996, Ed. Bened. 1698: 

" If you wish to confound the opinions of the Gentiles and of the heretic^ 
hac to shew that the knowledge of God is not to oe found with them, but *U 
Urie *hurch alone, you may repeat the words of the 79th psalm." 

St. Hilary, in his Commentary on Matthew, c. xvii, p. 676, 
Ed. Bened : 

*• Christ (teachins; from the ship) intimates, that they who are out of the 
chuich can possess no understandmg of the divine word. For the ship is an 
emblem of the church, within which, as the word of life is planted and 
preached, so they who are without, being as barren and useless sands, can- 
not understand it." 

St. Basil the Great, Bishop of Caesarea, in Cappadocia, Lib. 
de Spirit. Sanct. chap, xvi, t. 3, p. 34 : 

"The order and government of the church, is it not manifestly and beyond 
contradiction the work of the Holy Ghost? For he gave to his church — first, 
apostles ; secondly, prophets ; thirdly, teachers," &c. — 1 Cor, xii, 28. 

St. Ephrem of Edessa, whose works were published in Latin 
oy Gerard Vesius, at Rome, and in Greek by Thwaites, at 
Oxford, and who was the disciple of St. James, Bishop of 
Nissibis in Mesopotamia, Sermon 25 — Adv. Heres. t. 4, p, 
499— Edit. Quirini— Romas, 2740 : 

" They again must be reproved, who wander from the road, to run mto 
uncertain and devious tracks ; for the way of salvation holds out certain 
marks by which you may learn that this is the path which the Messenger of 
Peace trod ; while the wise whom the Holy Spirit instructed walked over; 
and the Prophets and Apostles pointed out to us. My brethren let us walk 
in this way by which his divine Son travelled. This is the royal road which 
leads us to happiness." 

St. Cyril, patriarch of Jerusalem: 

"The church is called Catholic because it teaches Calholicly, and with- 
out any omission, all points that men should know concerning things visible 
tnd invisible, heavenly and earthly." — Catechism, 18, No. 2, page 270. 

ibidem. Cat. 4, No. 20. — "Learn sedulously from the church, which aie 
:be books of the Old and J^ew Testament.''^ 

Ibidem, Cat. 5, No. ^ — '* Guard the faith, and that faith alone which if 
ttow delivered to thee b^ the church, confirmed as it is by all ;he scripturcfe." 

Mr. Pope rose and said — Gentlemen, I find it necessary, in 
consequence of an observation which fell from Mr. Maguire 
towards the conclusion of his first speech, tc give the follo^^ ing 
statement relative to my confession of fiith. I shall read for 
von a document, which was handed to Mr. Maguire, w'tl^ul 
tue slightest hesitation by Mr. Singer : 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHuRcH. 21 

**I do not stand for\N ard as the advocate of any particular cliurch, but ot 
tfie great leidincr doctrines held in common by the reformed churches, ai 
contained in their published creeds, and as an opposer of tiie tenets of the 
church of Rome, aguinst which they in common protept, 

"Our controversy is not about church-government, bat about doi'trines. 
^ "1 hold the doctrine of the Trinity. 

"The sufficiency of the scriptures to salvation, the Apocrypha having 
been rejected. 

" The utter depravity of human nature, and the necessity of a change of 
ireart, before the soul can be admitted to the kingdom of heaven. 

"The guilt and condemnation of man, and justification before Jod hj 
fiuth alone, in the finislied work of Christ. 

" That good works spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith. 

" I protest against Infallibility ; doctrine of Supererogation ; Human 
Merit ; Transubstantiation ; the Sacrifice of the Mass ; Service in an 
unknown tongue; Communion in one kind; AdoruJon of Images; an< 
Invocation of Saints and Angels." 

While I acknowledge to Mr. Maguire, that 1 could not sub- 
scribe to every one of the 39 articles, I beg to refer to the 
following articles, as a further exposition of my faith, — articles 
1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and all 
the protestations against the church of Rome, contained in the 
other articles. Those are the principles which every real 
Protestant professes, and to them 1 most cordially subscribe. 

My friend has complained, that he has discovered no tangible 
matter on which to oppose me. Mr. Maguire should remem- 
ber, that we accuse the church of Rome of overwhelming the 
whole structure of Christianity, by the addition of novel 
opinions ; and, therefore, he carmot find fault with me, if my 
profession of faith is contained within a muf-h shorter compass 
than his. Mr. Maguire has touched upon some subjects, 
amongst others, the right of private judgment, which by oui 
arrangements were not to come under consideration until a 
future day — I shall not follow him in his wanderings, but shall 
at once proceed to the subject more immediately before us — 
the proots of the infallibility of the Roman Cathohc church. 
My learned friend has endeavored to prove his point, by bririg- 
ing forward various passages of scripture, which he, no doubt, 
looked upon as proofs. But I charge him at once with a 
^^ petilio principii,^^ and maintain that the onus rests on him of 
eioving that the church of Rome is the church of Christ. 
Unt'l he shall bring forward proofs to demonstrate this, the 
passages which he has adduced relative to the church of Christ 
are irrelevant. My learnef friend has also brought forward 
various quotations from the Fathers. While I admit, that as 
historians and witnesses of what may have occurred in the 
times during which they lived, we may receive the testimony of 
the Fathers ; yet I do say, we are not to place any great weight 
apon their authority — and I contend fcr it, that we are only to 



82 THE INFALLIBILITY OP 

receive their expositions, when those expositions approve them 
selves to our judgments, as in accordance with the general 
tenor of the sacred scriptures. Having made these general 
remarks upon the Fathers, I beg to read the advice given 
by St. xlugustin and Chrysostom, which,- perchance, may assist 
Mr. Maguire in deciding, whether the church of Rome be the 
church of Christ. From St. Augustin, "De Uniiate Ecclesicp^^^^ 
cap. 16, I read as follows. Speaking of the Donatists : — 

" [^etthem," he says, "if they can demonstrate their church not by the talk 
■iid lumor of the iVCricans ; not by the Councils of their own Bishops ; not 
by the books of their disputers ; not by deceitful miracles, against which we 
tre cautioned by the word of God, but in the prescript of the law, in the 
predictions of the Prophets, in the verses of the Psalms, in the voice of the 
Shepherd himself, in the preaching and works of the Evangelists ; that is, in 
all canonical authorities of the sacred scriptures." 

St. Chrysostom also : 

" Formerly it might have been ascertained by various means, which was 
he true church, but at present there is no other means left for 

THOSE WHO ARE WILLING TO DISCOVER THE TRUE CHURCH OF ChRIST BUT 

BY THE SCRIPTURES ALONE. And why ? Becausc heresy has all outward 
observances in common with her. If a man, therefore, be desirous of know- 
mg the true Church, how will he be able to do it amidst so great a resem- 
blance, but by the scriptures alone? Wherefore, our Lord foreseeing that 
Buch a great confusion of things would take place in the latter days, ordered 
the Christians to have recourse to nothing but the scriptures." — Horn, 49, in 
Matt. xxiv. 

From these quotations, you will perceive, that much of the 
controversy resolves itself into this simple question — Are the 
doctrines of the church of Rome those which the Bible teaches ? 
How then are we to know this but from the Bible ? We must 
first then be in possession of the doctrines of the church of 
Christ, in order to determine, vrhether the church of Rome be 
the church of Christ — and then, forsooth, we must go back to 
the church of Rome, in order to learn what the doctrines of the 
charch of Christ are ? 

Methinks, my friend should have given some definition of 
" The Church." — He should have stated, where the infallibility 
of the church is lodged. Whether in a general council, inde- 
pendently of the Pope, or whether in the Pope independently of 
a s^enerai council — whether in a council and the Pope together 
—or in the universal church dispersed throughout the world — 
*br if I know not where this infallibility lies, even supposing 
that it did exist, of what possible use can it be to me ? I assert, 
that there is not a single passage throughout the entire scrip- 
luies, in which the word "church" means the body of the eccle- 
siasiicid officers exclusive of the Christian congregations over 
which they preside. The word church occurs in about ninety 
places in the New Testament * and there is not one, in which i 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 29 

19 to be understood of the ecclesiastical governors of the church, 
to the exclusion of the people under their charge. 

We shall sec the opmions of the Fathers on the meaning of 
the word church. St. Clemens Alexandrinus, calls the church 
a congregation of the elect. — {Strom, 7, p. 715.) In the same 
sense it is used by St. Ignatius, by GritopuluB, by St. Cyril of 
A-lexandria, by Isidore Pelusiota, (Ig. ad Trail Crit. in Confess, 
Fid. c. 7. Cyril, in cap. 42, les. p. 54. Isid. ep. 246, 1. 2, p 
2>i6,) and others, lobius Monachus says, that " the peop 
Relieving in God constitute the church." — (In Bib. Phot. Cod. 
122, p. 636.) To nearly the same effect speaks St. Basil, 
Theophylact, (Basil ep. 393, Theoph. in 1 ad Cor. c. l,p. 164,) 
and other Fathers and eminent ecclesiastical writers. Zonaras, 
who may be considered as high authority in respect of the 
import of ecclesiastical terms, says, that "the word 'church,* 
properly denotes a congregation of the faithful." — (Ad Can. 6. 
Grang. p. 314.) We see, therefore, from the scriptures them- 
selves, and from the authority of the Fathers whom I have 
quoted, that the word " church" does not signify an ecclesiastical 
synod or a general council — but the body of the faithful. So 
that even supposiug it did appear from the scriptures, that the 
church of Christ is infallible, it is evident that that infallibility 
must not be restricted to the ecclesiastical rulers, but must be 
extended to the entire body of Christians scattered over the 
world, laics as well as ecclesiastics. My friend next referred 
to Isaiah, lix, 21, and he told us that many Protestant divines 
consider the prophet as speaking in that passage of the future 
church. I beg to say, however, that many learned Protestants 
have considered it as referring to the Jewish church, subsequently 
to their restoration and introduction to the Christian dispensation. 
— If it confers a privilege on any, it confers it on all wh 
constitute the church of Christ ; but it seems to confer 
particularlij on the Jewish churchy as the promise was originally 
addressed to them. The words are, "my spirit that is in thee shall 
not depart from out of thy mouth from henceforth," &c. The 
learned gentleman in his next remark, also followed up the 
peiitio principiu "as my Father sent me, so also send I you," and 
t ikes for granted that these words apply to successors of the 
Apostles. But the onus is on him to prove, that every thing said 
o the Apostles is also said to their successors ; and again the 
DRUs rests on him to show, that the ecclesiastics or Popes of 
Rome are the successors of the Apostles. This be has not yet 
9.ttempted to show, and until he does so, of what avail are alibis 
assertions. Again he quotes, " Behold I am with you all days," 
and asks, how could he be with the Apostles to the end of the 
world, seeing thev \f efe mortal men '\ He should bear in mind« 



84 THE INFALLTBITJTY OF 

that not a line of the New Testament was written wTieh n^ sprmt 
these words. The "end" is regarded by many as the con- 
summation of the Mosaical dispensation — the original word is 
literally " age," and not world. But Christ was in truth with the 
Apostles while in the flesh, in the power of his spirit ; and he will 
no doubt, be with tkeir doctrines (which under the influence of 
ths holy spirit, they committed to writing,) to the consummation 
of time— blessing them to the salvation of thousands yet unborn. 
But here I meet my friend, and deny that there are in the strict 
sense of the term any successors to the Apostles. When I shall 
see men performing miracles in the broad face of dmj, like them 
proving their doctrines by the law and the testimony, evidencing 
by the holiness of their lives that they are not of this world, and 
that they are valiant for the truth on earth ; then, and not till 
then, can I allow, that there are in the strict sense of the word 
any successors to the Apostles. 

"Whatever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven," 
has been alluded to by my friend. Why should that promise be 
exclusively claimed by the Pope and his clergy, which was made 
to the Apostles at large. — (Mat. xviii, 18.) It is a fact, which 
rests on the authority of historical testimony, that no bishop of 
the church of Rome assumed the title of universal bishop till 
the year 606, in the time of Boniface ; and Gregory the great, 
m an epistle written a few years before that period, makes this 
striking remark : " That if any person assume the title of 
universal priest, he is a forerunner of antichrist." But I would 
ask, if the promise was to be extended to any of the successors, 
why not to the successor of Peter at Jintioch^ and to the succes- 
sors of the other Apostles, to Polycarp, and to others of the early 
Fathers. My friend has said, that our Saviour promised to com- 
municate his power to the apostles, when he said, " All things 
are given unto me in heaven and in earth." I really cannot dis- 
cover this from the context. It is said, all power is given unto 
the Saviour; but because the power is given unto him, does it fol- 
low that he communicated that power to his Apostles and theii 
successors 1 The promises, even if admitted in the sense of 
my learned friend, rests upon this condition, " Teaching them to 
observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." There- 
fore, Mr. Maguire should show that the church of Rome is in 
accordance vv^ith the word of God? My friend has again re- 
ferred to ths church being " the pillar and the ground of faith.' 
Now, as I stated, before he can apply this or any similar pas 
sage to the church of Rome, he must first show that that church 
is the church of Christ — this he has not yet been able to prove 
Hid I assert with confidence that he never will. 

[ do admit indeed, that the universal body of the faithful, bf 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 25 

letting forth the purity of Christian doctrine, by exhibiting iti 
practical influence, and by asscnibling on the Lord's day, hold 
up a blazing light to the world, are " an Epistle known and read 
of men," and thus diffuse the truth as it is in Jesus. But I do 
not thence infer, that inf^illibility is the prerogative of the church 
of Christ, though I do hold that against the faithful the gates of 
hell shall not prevail, and that "neither death, nor life, nor angels, 
our principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to 
ccme, nor height nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able 
to separate them from the Igve of (xod, which is in Christ Jesus 
our Lord." To be preserved by the power of God, and to be 
Hatched over by his providcr.ce, does not imply infallibility ; and 
without the possession of such a prerogative, the church of Christ 
may be the pillar and ground of truth, by being a living exemplar 
of the influence of Christian doctrine." "To hear the Church," 
refers not to the universal church, but to the particular church with 
which the parties concerned happen to be connected. How is it 
possible, that an individual could make his complaint to the uni- 
versal church ! The gentleman has endeavored to give us an 
illustration, by comparing the church to the constituted authorities 
of the land. But I would ask, although we do look upon them 
as the proper expounders of the law of the nation, and appeal to 
them to decide in matters of dispute ; and although we do admit 
" that the powers that be are ordained of God," does this argue, 
that we consider them as infallible ? As far as the commands of 
^he church of Christ accord with the word of God, so far, and no 
farther, are they ratified in heaven. 

The expression " obey your prelates," my friend has also 
•Jjoted. Now, in the original, the word is rjyov/nsi^oig, — " Obey 
t iem that have the rule over you." We must be careful to 
attend to the tenor and spirit of scripture, and call no man mas* 
ter, save in so far as his guidance is agreeable to the word an(' 
will of God. Let it not be imagined that I am opposed 'o pas- 
toral authority. No, far from it — " Christ gave to his church, 
first, apostles, — secondly, prophets — thirdly, pastors and teacn- 
crs, for the perfecting ot the saints, for the work of the minis- 
try, for tie edifying of the body of Christ, My friend has referred 
to the passage, " Ye are the salt of the earth." He should 
have continued the Saviour's words, " If the salt have lost its 
savor, wherewith shall it be salted 1" Does this, I would aek, 
look like infallibility — " If the salt lose its savor, wherewith 
shall it be salted 1 It is then fit for nothing, but to be cast out 
and trodden under foot." 

Mr. Maguire has also referred to the passage, "Whose-soevcr 
I Bins ye forgive, they are forgiven, and vvhose-soever sins je 
retmn, they are retained." Now it must be remembered, thpitai 



550 Tiifc IJVFALLiBILITT OF 

j the time our Lord uttered these words, not a line of the .\c^ 
i Testament was witten.l) Christ was about to ii troduce a ne\t 
' dispensation ; ana ne appointed his Apostles as ministers of hi? 
new kingdom, with authority to exact laws and regulations for 
tiie governance thereof. The Saviour fully commissioned hi? 
Ap'^stles to make known the glories of his divine character, and 
(th« principles of Heaven's administration — to lay down the way 
of salvation, clearly and fully through a Redeemer's blood, and 
to describe the character of those whose sins had been blotted 
'>ut, or in other words to depict the sanctifying influence of tne 
gospel upon the life and conversation. I admit the power of the 
church of Christ to excommunicate from its society any, who 
by their unholy lives disgrace their profession, or, by their errors 
as to the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, give evidence, 
that they are not the followers of our Lord and Saviour. B\i\ 
even the authority of excommunication is restricted; for it avail? 
not except so far as the decision agrees with the will of heaven. 
Further — there is no standard authority as . WipHne in the 
church of Rome ; for Doctor Doyle, in hi« ^^^ ination on oath 
before the Lord's committee, page 240 >nen asked, "Does 
ihe last article in the priest's oath decla .; every thing done in 
the council of Trent binding? " replied, " That regards faith, 
DO' discipline. The French church never received the decrees 
»f the council of Trent regarding discipline: and in a part of 
Ireland such decrees are not received." My friend has spokep 
much about unity of sentiment and supreme authority. Th«- 
passage just read furnishes a sufficient comm.entary on his as- 
sertions relative to these points. There are many other proofs 
which I could adduce, that the church of Rome possesses n^ 
claim whatever to infallibility — but my time at present does no^ 
permit. Mr. Pope here resumed his seat. 

Mr. Maguire. — I regret exceedingly, that after all my en 
deavours to the reverse, this controversy is likely to be a war Of 
words, and not of argument. Let us come to close fighting — 
let Mr. Pope propose his objections seriatim^ and I pledge my 
self to answer them to your satisfaction. I fearlessly appeal i» 
scripture. He has stated that not a single passage in the Ne> 
Testament refers to church authority independently of the con- 
gregation. I aver that there are many such passages ; when oui 
Saviour says,—" If he will not hear thee, tell the church : and if 
he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen 
and the publican ; " he evidently alludes to a tribunal before 
which the offender is to Ve arraigned. Was the Bishop to b** 
arraigned before the peasant, and not the peasant before th# 
Bwhop] to— Christ intended that thcr« should bf» rulers in 



THE ROlflAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 27 

his church — that the Apostles, with their successors, shoulc 
corstitute a tribunal, to which obedience should be rendered 
and from which the ignorant and the illiterate should receive 
instruction in the faith. Mr. Pope says, that our Saviour must 
refer to a particular church, and not to the universal church, from 
ihe impossibility of referring to the latter. He might as well 
say, that any individual who sought redress from the laws of hia 
country, should appeal to the congregated magistrates of the 
country. An individual can appeal to a Bishop, as to a magis 
tiate — he can appeal from the Bishop to a Synod — from the Sy- 
nod he can appeal to the Pope, and from the Pope to a general 
Council, which, like the House of Lords, is the last resource., 
It was extraordinary sophistry, then, to argue, as Mr. Pope ha3 
done, that there is no tribunal but the universal church. 

He endeavors to bring the Holy Fathers into a qualified dis- 
repute, as Luther did before him. When Luther found the 
authority of the holy Fathers strong- against him, he said, "I care 
not if a thousand Chrysostoms, a thousand Cyprians, a thousand 
Augustines, stood up against me. And let this be my creed, 'I 
yiel-d to no man.' " Again, he says, " I, Dr. Martin Luther, as 
to those matters (articles of faith,) am and wish to be deefned 
obstinate, contumacious, and violent." Such was Luther's con- 
fession that the Fathers were against him. When Luther found 
a great number of sects arising amongst the reformers — Calvin 
denying the real presence — Zuinglius saying, that this is my 
BODY, means "this represents my body," he began to repent, 
and he threatened to return to Popery again, if they continue id 
to raise such schisms. Mr. Pope should not endeavor to briii^ 
the Holy Fathers into disrepute. If he says that they were fal- 
Uble, which I admit, yet he must allow that they are good and 
faithful witnesses of what was the Christian doctrine in their 
days. If I show, as I will, the infallibility of the church to be 
the doctrine of sixty Fathers at a time^ when Mr. Pope will ad- 
mit that the church was pure, then is it not evident that such 
doctrine must be true? If Mr. Pope answers in the negative, 
then he must contradict all Protestants who admit the authority 
o{ the fiist four councils — I do not include the council of Jeru- 
salem. Mr. Pope has said, that he cannot discover where this 
ai'thority exists in the Catholic church. If he had examined 
our divines and canonists, he would find that the Pope, at the 
head of a council regularly convened, in their decrees regard- 
ing faith, are admitted to be infallible. That is one instance. — 
Also, if the Pope, with a few bishops assembled, should issue 
decrees touching the deposit of faith, and which are subsequently 
received by the church dispersed, we account them infallible, at 
otherwise the promises of Christ to his church would fail 



2b THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

As »o ll e title Ecumenical, assumed by Boniface, i' certainly 
was condemned by Gregoi; the Great, when assumed in a di^ 
ferent sense by the patriarcn of Constantinople. It was then 
condemned by Gregory as a blasphemous heresy, because, as 
he said, there was no universal bishop in the unlimited sen^e 
m.eant by the patriarch of Constantinople, but Christ, who is 
with his f^hurch to the end of the world, teaching and preaching. 
But in a limited sense, the expression is not to be condemned, 
and tliat was the sense in which it was claimed by Boniface. 

Again, "as the Father has sent me, 1 also send you." Mr. 
Pope says, I did not prove that this was directed to anv but the 
apostles. I have already proved that our Savior promised he 
would be with them to the end of the world — not that they should 
live in a physical, but in a moral sense, and survive m the per- 
sons of their successors. Mr. Pope says that this applied to 
the Jewish church. I am sure the church of Enorland will be 
much obliged to him, for all his arguments tend as strongly 
against the established church of England, as against the church 
of Rome. The church of England, in her homilies, declares 
that she will not endure a departure from her liturgy in the slight- 
est degree. So far she claims obedience to her authority as 
well as the Catholic church. There could not in fact exist any 
regularity or order if Christ did not leave an authority to his 
church. Mr. Pope says, granting for a moment the church of 
Christ to be infallible, that the onus lies upon me to prove that 
the church of Rome is the church of Christ — this argument is 
mei e\y ad captandum. After I have proved that Christ estab- 
lished one true and infallible church on earth, do I not lay the 
Ratchet to the root of all the rest, and thus prove the falsehood 
<^t* all the heresies that have separated from that church ? and 
• onsequently have I not broken the neck of Protestantism gen- 
erally 1 Is it not evident that I can prove the infallibility of the 
church in the times of the Apostles, and under their successors, 
the bishops and martyrs, who died for the truth ? If Mr. Pope 
once admits the infallibility of any church, I have gained m^ 
point. I have proved to you manifestly that the passage whicl 
I quoted from Isaiah has reference to a future church. I shah 
read to you the passage again, with the preceding verse :— 

" And there shall come a Redeemer to Zion, and to them that return from 
anquily in Jacob, saith the Lord. This is my covenant with them, saith the 
Lord; my spirit that is in thee, and my words that I have put into thy mouth, 
ihall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mcuth of thy seed, nor out 
uf the mour,h of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, froui henceforth, an*, forever." 
Isaiah, Ux, 20, 21. 

Here the inspired prophet speaks of a Redeemer to come U 
Zic a, and tc estabhsh his church. Could there be a more obvi* 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 29 

9Ufi alIusH)n to Christ and bis church. In reference to my quota- 
tion "ye are the salt of the earth," Mr. Po}.e has reminded ..le 
of the addition, " If the salt shall lose its savor." I deny that 
the salt does lose its savor — I am not a chemist, but I can statn 
upon the authority of the most learned men, that salt cannci hisc, 
its savor — this, therefore, proves the infallibility of the church 
The Apostles are compared to salt, and as soon as the salt wmila 
lose its savor, they would lose their infallibility — that is never* 
Mr, Pope argues that when Christ talked of the church, he talked 
of the laity — will it be inferred, because Christ speaks one time 
in the aggregate, that he never speaks particularly of the bishopa 
and rulers whom the Holy spirit appointed to govern ihe church. 
Mr. Pope says that the passage, '' obey your prelates,'- means^ 
" obey your superiors in general." What says the Apostle Paul 1 

"Obey your prelates, and be subject to them. For they watch, as bein;i 
to render an account of your souls," &c. 

Are laymen, or magistrates, by Christ's appointment, to ren 
der an account of our souls? It would be absurd to suppose 
that the bishops should give an account of that which they have 
not the government.' . AVhat signifies how a government exists, 
if obedience be not rendered to it? — How absurd to suppose 
that an authority couid exist, and yet the people not be obliged 
to obey it. It is evident if an episcopal church were established 
by Christ, that bishops must be recognised in it. Our Saviour 
gave the feeding of the sheep and lambs to one, but he also 
gave the feeding of the lambs to the bishops. Mr. Pope 
contends that the text '' Feed my lambs, and feed my sheep,*' 
equally applies to ail the Apostles, but did not Christ addres>i 
himself to Peter onhj^ when he said, "Simon Barjona, lovest 
thou me more than these?" iVnd when Peter answered "Yea, 
Lord," — Christ replied, " Feed my lambs, feed my sheep." — 
Did he not also declare that there s'lould be but " one fold, and 
one shepherd." Now I should be glad to iearn what is there 
in a sheep-fold, beyond sheep and lambs? That is — dropping 
the metaphor, beyond clergy and laity. When, therefore, Christ 
commissioned Peter to feed both sheep and lambs, he gave him 
a charge over the clergy as well as the laity. — This is the sacrrd 
edifice raised by Christ, IVom which Mr. Pope has not been able 
\o pick a single stone. 

Mr. Pope has pronounced an eulogium upon the scriptures— 
1 too love and honor them, and I trust that in my life, I foil >^ 
their commands. I pay that respect to the scriptures, which [ 
pay to the images of our Saviour, his Apostles, and martyrs ; I 
follow their precepts, I hope ; but as to the adoration either of 
ficriotures oi of images, my sotd abhors — my nerves shrink from 
it. If, however the scriptures had been intended as the sole 

3* 



30 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

rult 01 faith, it is evident that Christ would have given a com- 
mand .0 write them. But no such command was given by oui 
l^aviour. He ordered his Apostles to go teach and preach ; and 
that those who belieced would be saved. Believed what ? The 
preaching of the Apostles. But he said nothing about writing. 
My arguments remain so]id and undisturbed. I thvirefore sit 
down, till objections of a more tangible and serious nature shall 
'^€ ad\anced. 

Mr. Pope rose and said — My learned friend has observed, 
Jtiat ho will wait, until some stronger arguments shall be brought 
forward against him. I really commend the spirit which he has 
evinced on this occasion. Ke remarks, that the arguments 
which I have advanced are not sufficiently weighty to deserve a 
reply ; and he reserves his proofs, that the church of Rome is 
Oie church of Christ, until the third day of the discussion. The 
jassages of scripture which speak of the church, I again affirm, 
do not refer to ecclesiastics exclusively. While I admit, that 
tie church of Christ will be preserved through every age, and 
taat the gates of hell shall never prevail against it, I still main 
lain, that not one single passage of scripture has been adduced, 
ur can be brought forward, proving that our Saviour conferred 
infallibility upon his church; and I again put Mr. Maguire to the 
proof of it. 

I shall now show you, from the testimony of Roman Catholic 
w riters, that the term, " church of Rome," was not considered 
a.s a designation of the general church of Christ; but that it was 
a' first merely given to distinguish that particular church ^rom 
ciher churches — I would therefore ask, on what ground can the 
r hurch of Rome arrogate to herself the right of being consid- 
ered as the church of Christ, more than other churches. Du- 
pm, a Roman Catholic historian, and a doctor of the Sorbonne, 
has the following passage : 

" It is true (says he) that at present the name of the church of Rome ia 
given to the Catholic church, and that these two terms pass for synonynioLS, 
But in antiquity no more was intended by the name of the churcii of Ronio, 
U?.an the church of the city of Rome; and the Popes in their subscriptiong 
and superscriptions, took simply the quahty of Bishops of Rome. The 
Greek schismatics seem to be the first who gave the name of the church of 
H orne to ail the churches of the West ; whence the Latins made use of thii 
to distinguish the churches which communicated with the church of Rome, 
fr >m the Greeks, who were separated from her communion. From this came 
the custom to give the name of the church of Rome to the CathoHc cluircli.— - 
But the other churches did not for this lose ' .ji'' name or their authority," &c. 
— {Dupin. Traite de la Puiss. Ecdes. 4'C, p. 55 1.) 

Here, then, we see nothir.g, even upon Roman Catholic testi- 
mony, to induce us to esieem the Roman Catholic church ai 
exclusively the church of Christ. 



THE ROMAN CATLOi.IC CHURCH 81 

Again, Pope Innocent III tells us, (lib. ii, Ep. £C0.) 

" The church, indeed, is called Universal, which consists of all church eai| 
ivory where, which, by a Greek word, is denominated Catholic, thus tbb 
Roman church is not the Universal church, but a part of thb 
Univef sal church." 

Heie are the opinions of a Pope and a Roman Catholic his- 
torian. Bofn passages clearly show, that the term " church uf 
Ronie " did not signify the un'versal church of Christ, but thai 
th<; titi^e merely distinguished it from the other churches, whict 
had been established in various parts of the world. 

1 shall now show you, that the Fathers referred to the written 
word as the standard of faith. I shall quote to you the opinion 
of St. Ignatius, who was contemporary with the Apostles, and 
successor (so to speak) of St. Peter in Antioch. — It is recordec^- 
by Eusebius, lib. iii, Ecc. Hist. cap. 36. He informs us, that 
Ignatius being on his way from Syria to Rome, where he was 
to suffer martyrdom, addressed himself to the several churches 
on his journey, establishing them in the faith, and cautioning 
them against the heresies which then prevailed. — "He exhorted 
them to hold firmly by the tradition of the Apostles^ which testify^ 
ing that it had been already committed to writings he declared was 
necessarily so for its preservation.''^ 

Augustine also, in his lib. iii, contr. Lit. Petiliani c. 6. 

*'If any one concerning Christ or his church, or concerning any other thing 
nvhich belongs to faith or our life, I will not say, if we, but (what Paul hath 
atided) if an angel from heaven shall preach unto you, beside w^hat you have 
received in the legal and evangelical scripture, let aim be accursed." 

Again, St. Jerome, in c. 1st, Aggaei. 

" Those things which they make and find, as it were, by Apostolical tradi- 
tion, without the authority and testimony of Scnpture, the word of God 
smites." 

In my letter to Mr. Maguire, which appeared in the public 
prints, I referred to the opposition maintained by the early 
Fathers against the authority of the church of Rome. Wheneve** 
therefore, they advocated the authority of the church of Christ 
it would not be the authority of that church which they themselves 
opposed. But my friend brought forward an analogy, and asked 
me, *' does not each particular mag^istrate in his own jurisdiction 
represent the executive authority]" And he argued from this, - 
that each and every individual bishop should be regarded in the 
same light with respect to the charch. I ask him, will he say 
that each and every particular bishop of the church of Rome ia 
uifaJible 1 I am sure Mr. Maguire believes no such thing. 

Further — in order to show my friend, that the power of judg- 
ing was vested not in. a single person, but in the body of the 
Christian congregation, I refer him to the first Epistle to the 
Corinthians, v, 12, where the apostle asks, "Do vou iiot judga 



S8 THE INFALLIBILITY OP 

them that are within?" And I inquire, to whom was this querj 
addressed? Was it to the ecclesiastical rulers, or to the body 
of the church] Consult the Douay edition of the scriptures 
and you will find, that the epistle is addressed " to the church of 
God that is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Chribj 
Jesus, called to be saints, with all that invoke the Lord Jesus 
Christ, in every place." — Now, I would ask my triend, are ec- 
clesiastical officers the only individuals thus denominated? Are 
ihey alone the sanctified in Christ Jesus ? Are they alone called 
to be saints, and do they alone invoke the name of our Lord and 
Saviour? In the 2d epistle to the same church, ii, 10, it is said, 
**io whom ye have pardoned any thing, I also." A reference 
to the epistle v/ill show that this passage also refers to the entire 
body. My friend quoted a verse of the 18lh chapter of Matthew 
" Wherever two or three are gathered together in my name, 
there am I in the midst of them." Now I of course admit this. 
The great head of the church, the Lord Jesus Christ, is present 
with his people, wherever they are congregated in his name. — 
But, though present with them by His Spirit, does he, therefore, 
confer on them the prerogative of infallibility ? 

As to the testimony of the Fathers — I am quite wilhng to admit, 
that they may be referred to as faithful witnesses of the opinions 
current in their times. And, is not every faithful historian 
entitled to the same credit? But I would ask, when we refer 
to Hume, or to any other historian, do we thence infer, that, 
because they are faithful witnesses, they are, therefore, infallible ? 
My friend has referred ro two sources of infallibility. Now 
«vo are informed by Cfixries Butler, Esq., in his Book of tiio 
Roman Catholic charch, p. 121 — 124, that there does exist a 
difference between the Italians and the French church, respect- 
ing the infallibility of the Pope. The Italians believe in the in- 
fallibility of the Pope ; the French hold the contrary opinion — 
the former receive the dogmas of the Pope as infallible ; the 
latter reject them, if they be only ftr se or ex-cathedra. Here we 
have two bodies referring to sources of infallibility, which rnay 
often jar with each other. I therefore ask, can there be any 
certainty, on their own grounds, as to the foundation of their faith? 
My friend has commented on the opinion of Pope (Gregory, in 
reference to the title of the Pope. I shall read to you the passi?§e. 

*' I confidently say, that whosoever calls bimself the Universal Priest, oi 
desires to be so called, in his arrogance, is a forerunner of Antichrist," — Lib. 
fi, Ep. 30. 

Gregory VII, tells us, 1. ii, ep. 55, that " the Roman Pontiff 
alone is rightly called universal.*' Here then again you will 
perceive, that we have Pope against Pope, and one body against 
another body on the authority and infallibility of the Pope. lo 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH 35 

fclatioi. to the passage which my friend has quoted, where our 
Saviour says, "he will be with his disciples to the consummation 
of time," I merely observed, that it is the opinion of some an- 
cient <-ritics, that the words mean " to the end of the Mosaic 
dispen nation," — not but that our Saviour will be with his Apostles 
in iheir ivritings to the end of time. While, however, I men- 
tion this, merely as the opinion of eminent critics, I am quite 
willing to allow, that although the Apostles have no success'?rs 
in the strict sense of the term, our Lord has promised to be witl 
those who labor in the word and doctrine, by giving seals td 
ihiiir ministry, as long as they continue to teach whatsoever he ha^ 
commanded in His Holy Word. 

My friend has again referred to the passage whi<"h says, " if 
the salt lose its savor," and he has told us, that salt cannot lose 
its flavor, and therefore would build upon it the infaJUbility of the 
church of Rome. That salt for a long time retains its savor, I 
admit ; but can my friend prove that it is never decomposed. — 
And does he not, by his remark upon the passage, make the 
adorable Redeemer contradict himself? Although our Lord 
knew all things, we invariably find him, in his discourses with his 
(fisciples and others, using those terms which were most familial 
to them, and accommodating his language to their capacities 
and modes of thinking. — Even in the present day, we speak of 
the rising and setting of the sun, although it is known that the 
3un neither rises nor sets. — These remarks account for our 
Saviour's employing the mode of expression which we are coif 
sidering. In connection with this passage, I would ask, was 
there not a Judas even among the Apostles, and did he not sel' 
his master, and put himself to death] 

I shall now refer Mr. Maguire to a passage of scripture, and 
I ask him how he can reconcile the infallibility of the church of 
Rome wi\h it? In Romans, xi, 22, " See then the goodness and 
the severity of God : towards them indeed that are fallen, the 
severity; but towards thee, the goodness of God, if thou abik 
in goodn^.ss, otherivise thou also shall be cut o^." Mark this ! 
'' othervv^* ^e thou also shalt be cut off." I ask, does the church 
of Roi^ m the present day wish to identify herself with the early 
ohu: ch to which the Apostle wrote these words, or not? If not, 
then is her antiquity scattered to the four winds of heaven. And 
if she tloos, I would ask, is not this a strange threat to be 
addressed lu C? infallible church ! 

My friend has again quoted the passage, " He that will not 
hear the church" — but can he show that this speaks of pastors 
exclusively, and not of the people also? I have already proved, 
that every Christian body is authorised to judge them that ar« 
wiuuu. " Feed my sheep'' was «^nother passage brought lor- 



84 THE INFALLIBILITY OP 

W3.vd by Mr Maguire ; and in reference to it, I beg to call youi 
attevition to the authorities of some early Fathers on the sub- 
ject. St. Augustin says — " when it is said unto Peter, ' feed 
my sheep,' it is said unto all." — (De agon. Christ, c. 30.) St. 
Ambrose says, " which sheep and flock St. Peter did not 
receive alone, but we all received them with him." — (Lib. dc 
Sacred ) The passage, " one fold and one shepherd," has beea 
quoted by Mr. Maguire. Our Lord's meaning clearly is this, 
that the church which had been confined exclusively to the Jews, 
was now to combine both Jew and Gentile ; that the barrier 
which separated them, was henceforth to be thrown down, and 
the waters of life to flow beyond the limits of the Jewish people, 
carrying health and fertility through the whole world. The 
onus lies on my friend, to show where the church of Rome is 
called the church of Christ, or where the Pope is called the 
shepherd. I am convinced that he cannot do so. I assert^ on 
the contrary, that to call any creature the head of Christ's church 
on earth, is to utter a blasphemy against the Son of God, who 
icj aloao the head of the church. / The Psalmist says, " The 
Lord is my shepherd, and I shall not want." — Psalm xxii. B?.< 
my friend has again referred to the passage in Isaiah, where it is 
said, that '* the words of the Lord shall not depart out of thy 
iiioufh from henceforth and for ever." If you consult the con- 
te.^t, you will perceive that it was probably addressed in an espe- 
cial sense to the Jewish church, as he mentions Zion and Jacob. 
Some commentators do refer it to the restoration of literal Israel. 
But in truth, if this promise confers infallibility on any church, 
then the promise of the Holy Spirit will confer infallibility on 
every behever. In the epistle to the Romans, St. Paul says, 
" If any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his.'' 
Now, I ask my friend, are we to understand by this, that every 
individual having the spirit of Christ is thereby rendered infalli- 
ble? May not a person be enlightened by the holy spiiit, with- 
out being rendered infallible also 1 The passage from Isaiiih, 
therefore, does not prove any thing for my learned friend's argu- 
ment. He has again quoted, " Obey your prelates." Now, I 
find in other parts of the sacred scriptures, that we are desired 
"to try the spirits whether they are of God, because many false 
prophets have gone out into the world." Again, I read, "to 
the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to 
this word, it is because there is no light in them," or as the 
Douay version gives it, " they shall not see the morning light." 
And again, I find St. Paul saying, " I speak as unto wise men, 
judge ye yourselves what I say." — (1 Cor. x, 15.) And oul 
Lord himself asks, " why even of your ownselves, jiidge ye not 
vhat is right]" — (Luke xii, 57,) If we are thus desired to try 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. SS 

he spinis — to go to the law and the testimony and lo judge 
ind examine for ourselves, are we, in opposition to the express 
licrates ot the word of God, to receive every thing which an 
3ccles:astic tells us, without examining whether the doctrines and 
>rex;cpts inculcated upon us are in accordance with, or opposed 
o, t'\e revealed will of heaven? And if we are authorised ta 
3ya7iine, as to the truth or falsehood of the doctrines brought 
bffore us, then will it clearly follow, that no church is infallible. 

In conclusion, I shall now propose one or two questions to 
my learned friend, to which I shall thank him to give me ex- 
plicit ansv^ers. In the first place, I should wish him to inform 
n e, how many general Councils have been held? 

Secondly — By what characteristics are general Councils to 
b( distinguished from others ? 

Thirdly — Can my reverend friend produce an authenticated 
translation of the scriptures, perfect and infallible? 

And Fourthly — Can he point us to an infallible commentary 
apoii those scriptures ? 

These questions I put to him, and these questions must be 
satisfactorily answered ; or else I assert, that I have strong pre- 
•jumptive evidence against the infallibility of the church of Rome 
For I say, if the church of Rome be infallible, we may expect^ 
that she is able to refer her doctrines to an infallible and clearly 
attested standard — and that she has given to her people an infaU 
lihle and authentic version of the sacred scriptures — and, as she 
holds that a commentary is indispensably necessary, we may 
also expect that she has furnished an infallible commentary, so 
that h( r followers may not wander in the wilderness of error 
but have a sure and certain guide to direct them. A priest 
declares at his ordination on oath, that he, 

" Uahesltatingly receives all things, defined, delivered, and declared by tfe* 
noly canons, and general councils ; " 

and I ask, therefore, have I not a right to put these questions t,^ 
any priest of the Roman Catholic church? 

V Mr. Maguire. — It may, perhaps, appear to many of my 
auditory, that I have an Herculean task to perform. A great 
auml^er of questions have been put to me to answer, which would 
require much more than the comparatively short period allotted 
to me for addressing you. Mr. Pope opened his speech by 
endeavoring to draw a distinction between the church of Rome 
and the Catholic church. 1 beg and crave the kind and impar- 
tial attention of all, while I clear up what he seems to consider 
an insuvniountable difficulty. In the early ages of Christianity 
tiie church was not known by any other name than that of th^ 



S6 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

Catholic church. It was so designateil in the Apostles^ creed 
No otm r church had then the audacity to compare i\i*eK with 
the cnurch of Christ. In the lapse of time^ however, -^rhen the 
Arians br.came impudent and powerful — when they got the 
Emperor Constantius on their side, and the temporal power was 
employed to subvert the church of Christ — when, in fine, thc-se 
heretics, imitating the example of Julian the apostate, who \ooled 
up the foundation of the old temple of Jerusalem, and vainly 
attempted to rebuild it, in order to falsify the prediction of the 
Son of God — sought to disprove the promises of Christ to his 
church, by overturning its government, and establishing a new 
one — it was then thought necessary, for distinction sake, to 
superadd the epithet Roman, as a communion with the See of 
Rome was looked upon as the test of unity, and all other churches 
declared heretical or schismatical, which refused to acknowledge 
the bishop of Rome, the vicar of Christ on earth. Thus the 
word consubstantial was first mtroduced at the Council of Nice. 
We all know that the term had no origin in the scriptures. The 
word, however, is to be found in the Liturgy of the Protestan 
church. My friend must admit that the term *^ Roman " was in 
troduced lawfully, and according to the gospel, or he must deny 
that the term ^* consubstantial," was introduced lawfully — he 
must den} the Council of Nice, which is acknowledged by Dr 
Walton, and all Protestant historians. The name makes nothing 
for my friend's argument. Though the name Roman has 
been added, it is still the same church. When Arius broachc^ 
his heresy, the Catholic church either then was m existence. *»r 
it was not. If it was then in existence, Arius had no right to 
set up a church against the church of God. If it was not the 
Catholic church which condemned Arius, the church which he 
set up could not be the Catholic church, for he, for a time, stood 
alone. Where was the Catholic church at the time when Luther, 
as he says himself, stood alone, and was the only one who had 
the courage to apply the hatchet to the root of Popery ? The 
name Roman was then, as I have clearly proved to you, giver 
to the Catholic church to serve as a distinction. 

I have already explained to you, that the title ecumenical, ai 
assumed by the patriarch of Constantinople, was blasphemous, 
Christ is the only ecumenical pastor — he is the foundation and 
llie corner-stone. The Apostles formed the edifice— But if the 
word be taken in the limited sense in which it is applied to the 
bishop of Rome — that is the visible tiead of the Universal 
Church — it is not blasphemy. Mr. Pope has repeated the quo- 
tation from St. Augustin — there the arguments of St. Augus- 
Kin are employed against the Donatists, who^ like Mr. Pope 
fiim^elf, set up their own authority against tl?at of the Catl*^);* 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 87 

thuTch — who appeali d from the authority of the church, and 
from a regularly ordained ministry to their own private opinions. 
It is just as if an individual having been condemned in the 
King's Bencii, then appealed to the House of Lords, and tnon 
to tne King, and, on the decision being given against hmi, he 
should recur to his own private authority. 

Mr. Pope has quoted St. Augustin and St. Jerome, who dis- 
anguished between the church of Rome, and the Catholic church* 
Ijut those fathers have sometimes spoken of the church of Roiiie 
^9 a diocess, or as a patriarchate. Did they, however, deny 
ihat the church of Rome was the mother and matrice of all othe; 
ciiurches ? Let them speak for themselves. 

In his eleventh book De Doctrina Christiana^ where laying 
do\?n a rule to distinguish canonical books, St. Augustin says- • 

'*Tn this inquiry, the authority of the greater part of the Churches mu?tbc 
followed, and particularly of those that hold apostolical sees, and received 
eplstlos iVom the Apostles." 

And lib. Contra Evistolam Fundamenti^ he says — 

**Many are the considerations which keep me in the Catholic church — th« 
ajb?nt of nations — her authority — first established by miracles — cherished 
oy hope — extended by charity — strengthened by lapse of years ; the succes 
5ton of pastors from the chair of Peter, to whom the Lord committed the care of 
feeding his flock down to the present bishop ; lastly, the name itself of Catholic!^ 

Thus he identifies the Cathohc church with the bishop of 
Rome, to whom he says, Christ committed the care of feeding 
his fiock. So much for the distinction between the church of 
Rome and the Catholic church. 

Mr. Pope admits, that a man may be excommunicated. Ho rr 
can the church excommunicate unless it possess authority ? in 
it not evident too, that it is an authority to which man shoitof 
yield obedience] What does St. Augustin say] 

" I would not believe the gospel, if the authority of the Catholic church du 
rM)t mo^'e me thereto." 

Will Mr. Pope show me, that he does not deviate from the 
living authority of the Catholic church ? I defy him to do so. 
He appeals, indeed, to an invisible church — he quotes a text of 
scripture to prove, that where two or three are gathered in the 
Lord^s name, there will he be in the midst of them. This i& 
no new doctrine. There our Lord speaks of private prayer.— • 
The Apostles command all to believe in the holy Catholic church. 
There never existed a time since the Apostles in which that holy 
Catholic church was not visible on earth, otherwise the Apostles 
would have bound us to believe in a church of whose existence 
there \^^s no certainty. 

Let Mr. Pope reconcile the idea of a Universal church, to 
tkat of two or three being assembled in Christ's name^ or lei 

4 



3^ VHE INFALLIBILITY OF 

h rn scow that two or three establish our notion of universahty 
Mr. Pope in vain appeals to his invisible church. This is an 
argument which would delight our infidels. The Jew may say 
to the Christian-—'* Jhrist made great promises to his church 
according to your account — he declared, the gates of hell should 
not prevail against her — and he said, that whoever should not 
hea)- her, should be condemned ; he also compared her to a city 
buiit jpon a mountain. Yet, we find that he has not fulfilled 
his promises — that his church may fail — that the gates of hell 
i;ave prevailed against her — that the spirit of God has departed 
from her and that the promises of visibility have been shame- 
fully violated. It is then necessary for you to look out for that 
Messiah, whose coming we daily expect." These arguments 
might be used against the man who admits, that a time did exist, 
since the coming of Christ, when there was no visible church 
upon earth. With regard to the authorities which I have pro- 
duced from the holy Fathers, I have quoted from them where 
ihey expressly treat of the authority of the church — T do not 
select passages from them v/here they allude to the church, mere- 
y by a side wind, and which passages prove nothing upon t^^e 
subject. Mr. Pope calls upon me to produce a genuine infal- 
lible translation of the Bible — that is to be found in our churcn, 
which is not in his. We have the Latin vulgate, the nobl^ 
translation of St. Jerome, and approved of by the council ot 
Trent — that is our acknowledged and authentic Bible. I retort 
upon Mr. Pope — I call upon him to show me any translation in 
nis church, that can be said to be infallible. The Protestant 
church is fallible — the translators of their Bible were fallible — 
and the man who reads it is fallible. How can certainty be 
built upon uncertainty ] How can infallibility proceed from 
fallibilities, or to use an expression of a great dignitary of thd 
Established church, " How can an immoveable edifice be built 
upon a moveable foundation ? " 

Let Mr. Pope answer that argument if he can ; a child who 
is born in Mr. Pope's communion must remain a Deist till ho 
has arrived at the years of discretion. A Bible is then put into 
his hands. I will admit that he is conscious of the existence o. 
a God — All his works proclaim it. " Coeii enarrant gloriam 
Dei, ^ Bat he can never ascertain of himself, from the book 
put into his hands, the religion which God has ordained. He 
must learn thai from his Clergy or from Mr. Pope — I respect 
the Pi otestant Clergy — I acknowledge they possess the titulus 
coloratus. Mr. Pope, I should remaik, is not sent, and St. Paul 
tells us that no one is to preach who is not called as Aaron was 
—''And how can they preach unless they be sent." The Pro- 
testant child, when the Bible is put into his hands cannot believe 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 89 

fn the infallibilify of the translator — he cannot ttke the scrip 
lures upon the authority of the Cathohc church, he must disbe* 
lieve them altogether. The Protestant Clergy should beware 
of the principles so confidently put forth at the present period, 
and to which they lend their countenance and support. If ever)^ 
individual is to be constituted interpreter of the scriptures, the 
day v^ill arrive when the clergy will be thrown overboard, and 
thu> will be glad to fly from the machinations of those whc wouliJ 
make every old woman in the country an interpreter and ex- 
pounder of the sacred word of God. 

VVher. Mr. Pope takes the Bible into his hands, he should 
prove that it is inspired. Granting that he establishes its authen- 
tirMty, he has done nothing, if he cannot prove its inspiration. I 
dtty him to do so upon his own principles, without being enclos- 
ed in a vicious circle. He receives the scriptures upon the r^na* 
of private judgment, and he then proves the divine right of pr 
vite judgment from the scriptures. With regard to general 
c.)uncils, he wishes to know how many have been recognised in 
the church. If I be not able at this moment to state with nu- 
merical certainty the councils which are received, he will con- 
clude that the church is not infallible. I tell him there have 
been eighteen ecumenical councils, whose definitions on articles 
of faith are held to be infallible. If Mr. Pope proves that any 
of the ecumenical councils have sanctioned any thing which 
contradicts the faith of the Catholic church, that indeed would 
be something like an unanswerable argument. He says that 
Home councils are received in one diocess, and others in another. 

There never was an ecumenical council held, but its doctrin'</S 
were immediately received throughout the church. But it is not 
so with regard to local discipline. We affirm that it would be 
scandalous and unchristian to break communion, on account of 
diflTerences in what is called local discipline. Mr. Pope dissents 
from the church of England, either in essentials, or he does noL 
If he differ in essentials, then there is no union in the Protes* 
tant churches. But if his cause of difference be not essential, 
he rends the seamless garment of Christ — he goes out of the 
ark of Noah without necessity, and separates without excuse 
from that general society of men — the Protestant chuich, and 
thus becomes a factious and dangerous member of society.™ 
What says the Apostle Paul? 

" I beseech that you walk worthy of the vocation in which you are callal, 
^ith all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in 
charity, careful to keep the unity ©f the spirit m the bond of peace. One 
body and one spirit ; as you are called in one hope of your calling. On€ 
Lord, one faith, one baptisRi, one God and Father of all, who is above all 
Mid through all, and in us all." — Epistle to the Epkesiansy iv, L 2, 3, 4, 5, & 



40 THE INFALLIBILITY OT 

Are aitferences allowed here ? Is the conduct of the herUicn 
ftnd reformers justified by this passage ? They all set up theii 
rigni of private jud<^ment, — Arius, Luther, Calvin, QEcolampadius 
and Zuinglius, the last of whom affirms, that in the worda 
" this is my body,*' the verb '* is " was used by Christ foj 
REPRESENTS, contrary to the doctrine of Luther, by whom he 
vvas excommunicated. 

The church of England says that good work^ ate necessary; 
IMr. Pope denies that they are. Baptism with the sign of the 
cross is received in the church of England. Will he show me 
any authority from Scripture for that ? We are told in scripture 
to keep holy the Sabbath day — Mr. Pope violates that com- 
mandment, by changing its object ; or he must admit, that all 
things appertaining to salvation are not contained in the 
scriptures. He still sophistically endeavors to raise a difference 
between the church of Rome and the Catholic church. But I 
have shown from St. Augustin and many other Fathers, that 
the church of Christ is none other than the various Christian 
churches throughout the world in communion with the church 
of Rome. Mr. Pope quotes St. Paul, to show that the promises 
of Christ to his church v/ere conditional. 'Tis well he admits 
that the promises were made, and it were better had he not 
attempted to prove them conditional. St. Paul, writing to the 
Gentiles dispersed at Rome, and who had been received into the 
church, warns them against vainly boasting of their election, and 
their having been preferred to the Jews. He tells them not tu 
Sjlory against the branches (meaning the Jews) who had been 
cut off through their incredulity, but rather to persevere in 
righteousness lest they should be cut off, and the Jews again 
engrafted. ''If thou continue in his goodness (says he,) otherwise 
thou also shalt be cut off." 

Mr. Pope rose and said, — My friend has touched on sevcraj 
topics, which more properly belong to the question to be dis- 
cussed to-morrow. I shall, therefore, for the present pass them 
by, and proceed at once to my subject. He says that oui 
Saviour did not give any command to write the scriptures. But 
if the sacred scriptures were not written by the command of 
God, then they cannot be inspired. He says, that I cannot show 
him any passages in the Bible, in which such a command is 
given — In the book of Exodus, xvii, 14, Douay version, I read. 

" And the Lord said to Moses ; xorite this for a memorial in a book, and 
deliver it tc the ears of Josue, for I will destroy the memory of Amalec from 
andor heaven." 

Again, in the 101 pftalm. — **Let these things i« written unto anoilMi 
generatioxL^ 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC cHUR::H. 41 

In the 30th Isaiah, 8 verse. — " Now, therefore, go in and write for Ihein 
apon box, and note it dihgently in a book, and it shall he in the latter days fa* 

u testimony for ever.''' 

Ezekiel, xliii, 11. — " Show them the form of the hoi<se, and of the fashioi. 

thereof, the goings-out, and the commf^ "n, and the whole plan thereof, and 

all its ordinances, and all its order, and ail its laws ; and tkou shalt ivritt it in 

their sight, that they niay keep the whole form thereof, and its ordinances, 

and do them." 

Hab. ii, 2. — " And the Lord answered me, and said; tcri/e the vision and 

fJUike it plain upon tables : that he that readeth it^ may run over i7.'* 

Rev. i, 1 1. — " What thou sayest, tonte in a book: and send to the seven 

church( s v/hich are in Asia." 

IDth verse of the same chapter. — " Write therefore the things which thou 

hiLst seen, and which are, and which must be done hereafter." 
Chap, ii, 1. — "Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus, wnte.^^ 
8 verse. — " And to the angel of the church of Smyrna, ivritej^ 
12 verse. — " And to the angel of the church of Pergamus, icrifeJ*^ 
18 verse. — " And to the angel of the church of Thyatira, u'Hfe." 
3 chap. 1st verse. — " And to the angel of the church of Sardis, write,''* 
7 verse. — "And to the angel of the church of Philadelphia, tt-ri^e." 
14 verse. — "And to the angel of the church of Laodicea, wi^e. Thes€ 

things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, who is the beginning of 

the creation of God." 

Here then are the exp-ess commands of onr Saviour himself, 
for writing at least particular portions of the word of God. We 
shall now see what are the opinions of Fathers upon the subject 
St. Augustin, de Consens. Evang. lib. i, cap, 7, says, 

"This first is to be discussed, which some are accustomed to ooj 3ct to — 
why the Lord himself wrote nothing ? Pagans chiefly start this objection.*^ 

And further, in the same book and 25th chap, he says : 

"When they (meaning the evangehsts) wrote what he showed and said, 
t is by no means to be inferred, that he himself did not write ; since he as the 
nead, dictated what his members put down ; for whatsoever he wished that 
we should know of his deeds or sayings, he commanded to be written as by 
lis own hands." 

And Gregory the Great (in Prsefat. in lib. Job.) 

"If having received letters from some great man, we read the worcTs, and 
should demand with what pen these words were written : this, indeed, would 
be most ridiculous, to trouble ourselves inquiring, not so much who was the 
author? or what was his name ? as with what pen the words were written ?'* 
"When, therefore, we believe the substance of the letters, and acknowledH:e 
tho Holy Spirit to be *he author of the matter, if tve should set about inrpiirinc 
for the scribe, what else are we doing than, if after reading letters we slioula 
vainly trouble our heads about the pen they were written with." 

And the same author says (Epist. hb. iv, indict, xii, ep. 31, 
Paris, 1705,) • 

" What are the holy scriptures, but a certain epistle from the omnipotent 
God to his creatures." 

And Alhanasius, in Rescript ad Liber, torn, i, speaking o! 
Christ, says : 

"He it i^ who has spoken by the prophets — He it is who has composed tfaC 
Did and ^ew Testament." 

4* 



42 THE INFALLIBILITY OP 

My i^ttrned friend made some observations? on the quotalion 
from D\ipin. The opinions of Dupin are clear and distinct upon 
the s'jbject ; and you have only to contrast his observations with 
tho?e of my friei J, to convince you, that the Roman Cathv>iic 
church was not in primitive times acknowledged as the universal 
church. He also referred to that passage in the creed where it 
is said, " I believe in the Holy Catholic church." The creed, 
1 admit, is an ancient document ; and were I even to grant that 
i was penned by the Apostles, Mr. Maguire need not have given 
himself the trouble of proving, that the universal church of Christ 
was called the Catholic church. I admit this at once ; but I 
den} as distinctly that this term applied to the cluirch of Rome ; 
and until Mr. Maguire proves this, I maintain that his otlier 
arguments go for nothing. I know my friend attaches great 
H^portance to the authority of the Fathers, and I shall now allude 
■^ a passage from Tertullian which was referred to in my lettei 
Mi Mr. Maguire. In order to secure Christians in true doctrine, 
%e recommends them to consult the Apostolic churches, men- 
tioning the churches of Corinth, of Philippi. of Thessalonica, 
and of Ephesus, as well as of Rome. — Tertul. de prascrip. aa 
U^r, § 14, j9. 108, 109. 

Now I would ask, had Tertullian considered that the church 
ot Rome was the universal church, or that she maintained an 
authority over other churches, would he have written thus? 
Would he have spoken of other churches in the same strain in 
which ho speaks of the church of Rome — had he considered 
her as the supreme or universal church? Truly Tertulliem did 
not place her in so high a rank as my friend would have us to 
suppose. In relation to this passage which I have quoted, 
the Roman Catholic writer, Beatus Rhenanus remarks, that 
•* if Tertullian were to utter such a sentiment in his day, relative 
to the church of Rome, he would not escape punishment." 
Rhenan. Argum. in Tert. de Praec. et alibi. Impres. Basil, 
1621. / could multiply many quotations from the Fathers to the 
name purport^ hut that I wish to occupy my time with other matter. 

In the Council of Chalcedon it was decreed, that equal 
respect should be paid to the Bishops of Constantinople and 
Rome. And I would ask, can any thing more distinctly prove, 
that the church of Rome was not in the earlier ages looked 
upon exclusively the church of Christ ? Or can any thing 
more directly contradict the assumption of universal authority 
claimed by that church? But I would also ask my friend, if 
Ihe church of Rome was in the lirst ages considered as the su- 
preme or universal church, how does it happen, that the Apostle 
Paul addressed epistles to several churches without the most 
distant reference to the authority of the church of Rome ; aud 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 43 

ihet, in the epistle which he addressed to the church cf Rome, 
he does not make the most indirect allusion to her being the 
C;.itholic or supreme Church, much less to her possessing the 
prerogative of infallibility I Nor is the epistle even addressed 
to Peter, who is said to have been the first Bishop of Eome. ' 
On the contrary, we find the epistle addressed '' to all," (mark 
that) '' to all that are at Rome, the beloved of God, called to bft 
saints." There is not one word, you perceive, about the 
Dialled supremacy of that Church — nor the least mention of 
the Apostle Peter. It is addressed to all those who composed 
the church of Christ in that city. Where, then, I would ask, is 
there the slightest ground of argument to show that the church 
of Rome was the supreme church ? I assert, that Mr. Maguire 
has not established his opinion on this subject ; while on the 
contrary, it must be evident to every one present, from the par^- 
eages which I have quoted from scripture, and from the Fatherj 
Uso, that no such doctrine was entertained in the first ages of 
'he church. My friend has brought forward the word " con- 
wubfcstantial," to show that words have been introduced, which 
are not to be found in scripture ; and argues that the term 
Roman Catholic may be also admitted, though not found in 
ssacred writ. I allow that there are many words used by theolo- 
gians which are not to be found in scripture, but deny that this 
makes for his argument. The terms which theologians use, do 
not contradict themselves ; but I appeal to common sense, is 
there not an evident contradiction in the term Roman Catholic ? 
To speak of a particular universal, I maintain, is absurd — 
" Where the true church was before Luther," and the Pope's 
supremacy, I shall consider, when we come to the question of 
the Reformation. 

My friend has referred to the passage which I quoted froni 
St. Augustin, pointing out the method by which we might dis- 
cover the true church of Christ. I confess that 1 vas not a 
little surprised at his commentary on that passage. If, however, , 
he admits that St. Augustin held that the scriptures were to be 
referred to m contentions with reputed heretics, — as the church 
of Rome considers me a heretic, she should condescend to refer 
me for the discovery of the marko of the true church to the 
same authority. St. Augustin again says, "I am unwillng 
that the church be demonstrated by hu'Tian documents but b} 
divine oracles." — [De Uniiat, Eccles. c. 3.) 

I did not cite '* where two or three are gathered together ia 
my name, there am I in the midst of them," ^o prove the invisi- 
bility of the church of Christ; — nor did I argue that two or 
three constituted the universal churcn. What I said was, that 
the church of Christ, or the universal church, consisted of thi 



44 THE INFALLIBILITy OP 

miire body of the faithful, however scattered over the worlta<— 
and the Great Head of ♦he Chinch had promised, that wHere- 
ever two or three were assembled together in his name h« 
would be with them to bless thorn and to preside over them. 
My friend has alluded to the promise made by Christ, "he shal^ 
guide you into all truth." But he should remember, that while, 
some of the promises refer to the great bod»y of those who com* 
pose the church of Christ, others were intended especialW fox 
the Apostles. Tn a succeeding chapter we find Christ promised 
the Comforter, " to bring to their rememhrayice all that he haa 
spoken.^^ We cannot say that we heard Christ speak viva voce^ 
as the Apostles did. And therefore it will be seen, that there 
are some of the promises which cannot apply to any but to 
them. My friend says, " he was quits with me on the Fathers." 
Now, I affirm, that the passages which I quoted from their 
writings, went distinctly to prove, that in the early ages, neither 
the infallibility, the supremacy, nor the uuiversality of the 
church of Rome was acknowledged. Should I grant, however 
that Mr. Maguire " was quits with me, in reference to the 
Fathers," what does the concession amount to? That we have 
Fathers against Fathers — and how shall we in the midst of 
such uncertainty, if we depend on them, be able to come to any 
specific conclusion ? I therefore do trust, that the result of the 
present discussion may be, that we shall throw the Fathers over- 
board, and sailing in the ark of the living God, his holy scrip- 
tures, launch out upon the great ocean of religious truth. My 
friend has said, that the version of the scriptures which contains 
the pure word of God, is that translated by Jerome, and sane* 
tioned by the council of Trent. The council of Trent pro- 
nounced an edition of the Yulgate, that was a/ieruards to It 
published " quana emendatissime," as correctly as possible — the 
standard edition. She pronounced a verdict upon an edition at 
the time, in utero, that had not seen the light. An edition of 
the Vulgate was published by the Louvain doctors, about thirty 
years after the council of Trent. Pope Sixtus V. not approv- 
ing of this edition, and wishing for a still more correct one, with 
great trouble brought together many learned Je \'ish and Roman 
Catholic doctors — the Vulgate was compared with the Greek 
and Hebrew originals, and the edition was completed. Sixtua 
considered it so perfect, that in his preface he declaied, that 
^ny one who should attempt to alter it "in minima particui^," 
should be subject to the major excommunication. Within 
three years after the publication of this immaculate and infallible 
edition, written as it was in a dead language, and therefore less 
liable to suffer from the variations to which a living language is 
iubject, another made its appearance arid3r the sun(5tion of 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 4A 

Po^e Clement VTII. And what think you? Nol withstanding 
the anathema which Pope Sixtus had pronounced on the indi- 
vicuhl who should, "in minimi particula," in the least particle 
altt: the edition published by him, it has been ascertained, that 
thai ^ were in the edition published by Clement YIII, no fewer 
than 2a00 variations from the text of the Sixtine edition. Dr. 
Jam /s has proved the existence of these differences between 
the ( lei/ientine and Sixtine editions, in his work entitled Bellum 
Papl >. x^ow, I would ask my learned friend, from which of 
tLese f divions has the version, which he represents to be so im- 
macuvAti), been taken 1 I answer, from the Clementine edition 
and net froAi me Sixtine. So that Pope Clement YIII, and the 
Doua) trariblaiors have inourred the penalty pronounced in the 
preface of the dixtine edition — have subjected themselves to 
2000 n ajores tyxcommunicationes. But this is not all. In the 
successive edi^^ons of the Douay version are to be found many 
discrep. ncies. If the present edition, of whose correctness my 
earned friend rias made such unwarrantable boast, be com- 
pared w th the Clementine and Sixtine editions, it will be found 
to differ not only irom both the Sixtine and Clementine, but 
also fro.n preceding editions of itself, as Mr. Hamilton has 
clearly shown. I snould mention that Clement bought up the 
Sixtine copies to guard, if possible, his predecessor from the 
charge of fallibility , so that but two copies, I believe, are ex- 
tant. Thus, we have Pope against Pope, and doctor against 
doctor. I again ask my friend to produce a perfect and im- 
maculate copy of the scriptures. I have shown you that he 
nannot do so. Then we have to charge his infallible church, 
uither with having failed in her duty towards her people, in not 
'uving provided a perfect 'edition of God's holy word ; or, on 
ue other hand, with inability to produce such a translation of 
the scriptures. Let my friend ^opt either alternative ; and I 
ask, what becomes of the boasted infallibility of his church ? 
He desired me to produce a perfect version of the Bible — I 
affirm, that although we do not boast of infallibility, we have a 
better version of the scriptures than his church can produce. I 
need not here occupy your time in speaking of the extreme 
pains and care, which wero taken by men of the greatest talenta 
and research, in preparing the present authorised version. 

Dr. Geddes, who was, at least at one period of his life, a 
Roman Catholic priest, a man of considerable literary attain* 
ments, has spoken of the Protestant Bible in terms of the great 
est commendation. He observes, — 

" The highest eulogiums have been madt kA\ the translation of James I, 
both by our own writers and by foreigners. And, indeed, if acruracy 
fidelity, and the strictest attention to the letter of tte text, be suppostd U 



46 THE INFALLIBILITY OP 

form the qualifications of an excellent version, this, of all versic.is, must m 
general be accounted the most excellent. Every sentence, every worti, 
every syllable, every letter and point, seem to have been weighed with the 
nicest exactitude, and expressed, either in the text, or margin, with the 
greatest precision. Pagninus himself is hardly more literal ; and it was 
trell observed by Robinson, above 100 years ago, that 'it may serve for a 
lexicon of the Hebrew language as well as for a translation.'" 

Hear the opinion of the celebrated J. K. L.* on the subject 
lie says, " The authorised version is a noble work, with all ita 
faults." We see, therefore, from the testimony of Roman 
Catholics, that our version of the scriptures is truly excellent ; 
and in confirmation of its great value, I beg to remark, thai 
each succeeding edition of the Douay Bible approximates 
nearer and nearer to the Protestant version. And is not this 
circumstance an acknowledgment, that the Protestant version is 
considered, even by the Roman Catholic hierarchy, as more 
accurate than their own ? 

Mr. Maguire. — I deny that our bible has approximated to 
the English edition. I deny the fact — let Mr. Pope prove it, and 
then show how, and in what manner, it has been effected. The 
apostle St. John is desired to write what he has seen " in a book, 
and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia^, to Ephesus, 
and Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, 
and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea." So far the apostle is 
commanded to write to the particular bishops of particular 
churches, conveying particular information. But from this a 
general conclusion is drawn by Mr. Pope that our Saviour com- 
manded the New Testament to be written. The Apostle is 
commanded to write to the angel of the church of Ephesus, and 
from this Mr. Pope draws the unjust and illogical conclusion, 
that a positive commandment has been given to write the New 
Testament. I come now to his argument drawn from the Six- 
tine and Clementine editions of the Bible. I may premise that 
the Pope's infallibility is not a doctrine of m.ine, nor of any 
Catholic. There are differences on the subject between the 
French and ultra Montanists, but they are merely the private 
opinions of private divines. The church has pronounced no 
opinion on it. The church only pronounces on essentials. l! 
leaves the human mind free to discuss other subjects respectmg 
which infallibility does not shut out inquiry — but the authority 
of the church is decisive in articles of faith, which cannot be 
ascertained by human power. How could the mass of man- 
kind be able to judge of the truth of the doctrine of the Trinity 
or of justification by faith ? how could they reconcile whh a 
iust God the doctrine of ongmal sin ] And what is the hnmap 

* Right Reverend James Doyle, Bishop of Kildare and L^ighiiiu 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 47 

nimd ? Is not the great mass of mankind composed of the ig- 
norant and lower orders ? It is only when every man is allowed 
to read and interpret the Bible, that 

"A little learning is a dangerous thing.'* 
Christianity is thrown overboard, and the church of Christ is 
scoffed at. It was by such means that infidelity spread through- 
out France and Germany. It is our duly to read the Bible, but 
it must be under proper circumstances. I love the Bible — I 
read the Bible — I believe it to be the infallible Word of God. 
Christ will not allow his children to use good food, when, b} 
the circumstances of the case, it might be converted into poison. 
Would you give to a child food of an indigestible quality? The 
Catholic church, knowing from experience the danger of an in- 
discriminate perusal of the scriptures, directs that the sacred 
volume should not be read by any who want the due disposition. 
The Catholic church is right in resisting the indiscriminate 
reading of the scriptures. If the Bible be at all imperfect, as 
Mr. Pope has been endeavouring to prove it, that would be a 
strong argument that it should not be put into the hands of the 
gnorant and illiterate without due caution. Mr. Pope quotes 
the authority of Pope Sixtus, that the scriptures shall not be 
altered from his edition, " ne in minima par ticul a. ^^ 

The Catholic divines, who wrote the catechism of the couii- 
cil, state, that Catholic doctrine shall not be changed ne in 
minima particula. Allusion is here made by the Pope to the. 
faith conveyed in the book, and not to matters of discipline 
in faith we yield to the authority of the church, which, as the 
holy Fathers say, is the solution of all difficulties. I will here 
call on Mr. Pope to compare the Sixtine and Clementine editions 
of the Bible with the Latin Vulgate, and see if he can find any 
thing in them as to substance and faith different. He talks of 
his Bible — it has undergone more substantial changes than any 
book in the world. There have been upwards of 7000 correc- 
tions made by Dr. Mills. Dr. Wharton was charged with 
promoting infidelity, having made such a skeleton of the Bible. 
Ward has proved the numerous corruptions in the Protestant 
Bible. Take an example — in the nineteenth chapter of Num- 
bc:-s, Moses is directed to take the ashes of a heifer that has been 
sacriiiced, and to sprinkle them with the water of expiation — 
lest this text might go to sanction holy water, it is translated the 
" water of separation" in the Protestant Bible — although m all 
ancient copies, it is either the water of lustration, purification, 
or aspersion. " A man," says Dr. Wall, another restorer of 
the Protestant Bible, •' cannot forbear having a strong stomach 
against our translators, who, with all the ancient copies befor« 
tbem« must nevertheless go astray." 



48 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

Luther, quoting the words of St. Paul, 

**For we believe that a man may be saved by faith, without the works of 
the law," (alluding to the Jewish law) adds to the text the word ' only ;' is 
the German ^allein.^ 

And when upbraided with this sacrilegious addition, he replied, 

' Km I not an apostle, as well as Paul — and should any Papist object to 
»R& ford only^ immediately oppose to him the tvill of Dr. Martin Luther, wuo 
^B a doctor above all Popish doctors, and who asserts, that the Pope and ac 
iss are synonymous terms —quid unum et idem.'' 

I hold myself responsible for the Vulgate. T challenge him 
to show me a material error in that translation. I receive it 
apon the authority of an infallible church. Mr, Pope will 
acknowledge no authority — he sets up his opinion not onh'agak»bt 
the Catholic, but against the Protestant churches. The Catho- 
lic church has preserved the authentic copy of the scriptures — 
from it the Protestant church has received it. Mr. Pope, 
however, denies any church possesses any authority to which 
any man is obliged to yield. I shall read to you a passage 
from St. Chrysostom. He says, — 

*' If you wage war against man you may conquer, or be overcome ; no 
force shall overcome the church. The church is much stronger than tiie 
<50^h — even stronger than heaven — for 'Heaven and earth shall pass away,' 
(Luke xxi, 33.) What words are these, Uhe gates of hell shcdl not prevail 
Against her?'' (Matt^ xvi, 18.) But if you doubt the word — ^-give credit to 
facts. How many tyrants have assailed the church of God — how many 
torments — wliat persecutions — what fires? They could effect nothing." 
Homily de Expidsione sua, tome iv, p. 843. 

And in his Homily, *' Quod Christus sit deus^^^ tome v, chap 
1 1 — he says, — 

"^ On this rock I will build my church.' — (Matt, xvi, 18.) Consider what 
</ IS means, and you will discover its evident truth, for it is not alone wonder- 
"^^ 1 that Christ built his church in all parts of the earth, but that he rendered 
Rjr impregnable, and invincible against all attacks — ' The gates of hell shall 
not prevail against her' — that is, no danger — not those that produce death, 
and lead to hell. Have you witnessed this prediction ? Have you benelcJ 
the certainty and strength of the event ? Have you seen the words manifested 
•-1 the fact, and the power, w^hich without arms accomplished all things ?'' 

\ now come again to the distinction which Mr. Pope has en- 
dear our»jd to draw between the Catholic church and the Roman 
Cathode church — it is a mere play upon words ; the Fathers, 
he aijserts, did not allow the church of Rome to be the Catholic 
(^,hurch. I have already told you, that in consequence of the 
separation of the Greek church, and the heresy of the Ariaus, 
the Catholic church was then for the first time, and as a distinc- 
tive mark, called the Roman Catholic church, and it included all 
the churches in the west, and throughout the world, ir.. com- 
munion wiih the see of Rome. This is the church ol whick 
St. Augustin says. Contra Evistolam Fundamenii — 



THE ROMA.N CATHOLIC CHURCH. 49 

••I would not believe tke gospel, if the authority of the Catli.iic church M 
not mov^ me thereto." 

And in his book De Symbolo^ 

"This is the holy church — the one church — the Catholic church — the trua 
church, which contending against all heresies may herself be assailed, but 
cannot be overcome. AU heresies have gone out from her, like useless 
bi-anches cut off from the vine — she herself remaining fixed to the root — fixed 
to the stock — fixed in charity, and against which the Agates of hell shall not 
pi^etail.^ " 

But as to the distinction between the church of Rome and 
the Catholic church, it was unknown to St. Augustin, unless 
wheii he happened to speak of the diocess of Rome. This I 
have shown in a former quotation, where he holds a succession 
from the chair of Peter, to whom Christ committed the care of 
the whole flock, to be absolutely necessary. And St. Jerome, 
in his letter to Pope Damascus, says, — 

" To thee I know were given the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Who 
doever ^athereth not with thee scattereth — that is, he that is not Christ's is 
antichrist's." 

And again he says, 

" I could dry up all the streams of your argument with one ray of that sun 
which shines upon the church." 

Irenseus is equally strong upon the very same point. Mr. 
Pope and I are at variance with respect to the interpretation ol 
a particular text. Mr. Pope says that every man should fol- 
low his private judgment. I maintain he should submit to the 
authority of the church. Mr. Pope then appeals to the tex*. 
Let him make the Bible speak. (Here Mr. Maguire laid his 
finger upon the Bible.) It is a poor rule of faith, truly, if it 
"annot decide. If he succeeds in making the Bible speak, J 
jhall be converted to his opinions ; but if the Bible remain mute, 
he should not set up as a rule of faith, a book which cannot 
pronounce a decision. According to my principles, the church 
.s to judge, that is to decide, upon matters of faith. The scrip- 
tures are the rule of our conduct — the church interpreting the 
scriptures is the rule of our faith. The scriptures we reverenc- 
9t d venerate, just as we do the images of Christ and his saints* 
The royal prophet laughed at the gods of the Gentiles, because 
they could not speak ; those who make the scriptures the solo 
judge of controversies, expose them to similar contempt, be- 
cause at the best, they are but a dumb judge, and consequently 
unable to pronounce. 

Mr. Pope says, Catholics believe articles of faith which are 
not in the scriptures. Protestants also believe many articles of 
^ith not to be found in the sacred volume. There are articles 
uf faith not explicitly revealed; Our Saviour himself tells hie 

5 



^ 



50 THfc. INFALLIBILITY OF 

disciples, that he has many more things to say to them, which 
they are not as yet able to bear ; but he promises at the sanje 
time to send the Holy Ghost, who would instruct them in all 
things. Their weak minds might have been shocked by the 
too sudden revelation of divine truths. It' such was the caution 
observed by Christ towards his apostles^ how much more ought 
it to be observed towards the poor and ignorant of mankind ? 
Mr. Pope endeavors to gloss over the fooleries and fanaticism 
gen>;rated by the principles which he advocates. But it is evi 
'Jent that the ignorant, the unlearned, and the weak-minded, 
who form the great majority of mankind, can alone proceed 
safely, when conducted by a living guide. If they be allowed 
to frame a rule of taith for themselves, embark without chart or 
compass upon the wide ocean of opinion — if they are allowed 
to think upon matters of faith as they please, the result will be, 
they will give way to prejudice and passion, and substitute iheir 
own judgment for the revelation of Jesus Christ. When Mr. 
Pope hands the Bible to the poor and ignorant Protestant, how 
can he know that it is the word of God. When the Protestant 
arrives at the years of discretion he must receive it from his 
parents, from some clergyman, or from Mr. Pope, and the only 
reason he can assign for his believing it is, that he received it 
from them or from Mr. Pope. Let the other rule be examined, 
and let the common sense of mankind judge whether it is not 
the better. The child receives the scriptures upon the authority 
of that church in reference to which St. Augustin said, " 1 
would not receive the gospels, unless upon the authority of the 
Catholic church." I may here remark, that there were at one* 
*ime in circulation nine spurious copies of the gospel of St 
Matthew, each pretending to be the true original. The apos- 
tolical churches were then consulted, and the genuine copy 
ascertained. The church pronounced her decision, upon which 
St. Augustin rested his faith. If Mr. Pope insists upon the 
scriptures being the sole rule of faith, then why does he not 
wash his neighbor's feet? As the Lord says to his disciples, 
** If I, being Lord and Master, have washed your feet ; you also 
ought to wash one another's feet." If he cannot show me that 
this is not a commandment, let him show me why he does not 
continue to obey it. Let him also justify from scripture the 
change in the observance of the Sabbath. 

Mr. Pope rose and said : — Gentlemen — my learned friend 
nas asked, when we are individually all fallible, by what proceug 
can we arrive at an infallible decision] I ask my friend the 
same question. He has told us, that he believes the Pope to be 
iklliblet and all the bishops and priests of the Romish church \m 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 61 

|K> fallible. Now, I should wish to know by what method iliey 
who according to Mr. Maguire's own confession are all fallible. 
can become infallible 1 He tolls me, that if my doctrines be 
admitted, a young child must remain an Atheist until he arrives 
at years of discretion. Now, what do I find the scriptures 
saying on this subject? "Train up a child in the w±y he 
should go, and when he is old he will not depart therefrom." 
The Psalmi.st declares, '* that out of the mouths of babes ano 
sucklings God has perfected praise :" and the Saviour remarks, 
that " the things which are hidden from the wise and prudent, 
are revealed unto babes." I readily admit, that, in the first 
instance, in a great degree, the faith of the Protestant child, as 
to the authenticity and inspiration of the scriptures, must rest 
on the veracity of the parent. And I ask Mr. Maguire, is noi 
this the case with the children of Roman Catholics ? How can 
a Roman Catholic child believe that the church of Rome is 
infallible, or that she possesses any authority, unless the child 
receives these opinions on the authority of the parent? 

JJo we, in point of fact, find more Atheists among the children 
of Protestants than among those of the Roman Catholic com- 
munion ? Let facts decide. But my friend says, I argue in a 
vicious circle, because I prove the inspiration and authority of 
the sacred scriptures by the right of private judgment, and 
maintain the right of every man to exercise his judgment by the 
authority of the scriptures. But this exercise of the judgment 
IS an inherent right, implanted in man by the God of Heaven, to 
«vhoin we are accountable. There is no other way given of 
discovering truth. We possess a natural right to exercise our 
judgments on the contents of any document purporting to be a 
revelation from God. The x\postles themselves appealed to 
the judgments of men. There is no other mode of deciding 
upon the authority of the scriptures, but by the exercise of pri- 
vate judgment. And a subsequent appeal to the inspired 
oracles in confirmation of the right of private judgment, does net 
militate against the laws of sound reasoning, 1 deny, there- 
fore, that I argued in a vicious circle. But, on the contrary, I 
assert, that this was the case with my friend, Mr. Maguire, 
What were the arguments which he made use of to show the 
authority of his Church? When asked to prove her authority, 
he refers to the scriptures ; and when again requested to prove 
the authority of the scriptures, he refers to the church. Just aa 
if I were (to give you a familiar illustration) to take two books, 
and place the one up the other — thus. — (Here Mr. Pope 
taking two books gave a practical illustration of his meaning.) 
The same part cannot be at once the superstructure and the 
r^andation. If the church ^ives authority to the scriptures, 



Di THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

(hen the authority of the church must be independoiit of the 
Bcripturey ; and we cannot appeal to the scriptures in support 
of her authority. If the scriptures give authority to the church 
the authority of the scriptures must be independent of the au- 
thority of the church ; and we cannot appeal to the c-hurch in 
support of their authority. My learned friend has asked me 
for my creed. I have given it ; and now return the question 
upon himself. He would, no doubt, tell me that he beheved 
whatever the church has decreed. This you will find is an 
^ xceedingly indefinite reply. My friend agreed with Delahogue 
in his Tractatus de Ecclesi^, that there are eighteen general 
councils ; but he was not quite certain as to the number, nor 
did he attempt to specify the peculiar characteristics necessary 
to designate a council as general. You perceive, therefore, 
when I ask Mr. Maguire for his confession of faith, he has to 
refer to general councils ; and yet at the same time he cannot 
state, by what mark a general council can be distinguishet' 
from others : while I appeal for my creed to certain well-defined 
articles, and to the Bible as the ground-work of the Christian 
faith. Now, I would ask, whose creeds is the most defined — 
mine, which is contained in the book of God, the Bible ; or 
Mr. Maguire's, who refers you to general councils, of the 
authority of some of which doubts are entertained ; and to the 
unanimous consent of the Fathers, scattered through a multi- 
tude of ponderous folios? I affirm, that I do not difi^er in any 
essential point of faith from the church of England, or from any 
Protestant communion. I think, however, my reverend friends 
<ol the Establishment will doubtless feel much obliged to Mr. 
^)aguire for his application of the Ark of Noah to the church of 
Vnghind. Mr. Maguire has stated, that we cannot find any 
*- ithonty in the scriptures for keeping the first day of the week 
instead of the seventh. I answer, that we find, that the disci- 
*jies assembled together on two successive first days, after the 
fcjaviour rose from the dead. — (John, xx, 19, 26.) In Acts, 
XX, 7, we are told, that on the first day of the week the disciples 
met together to break bread. And in 1 Cor. xvi, 2, the prac- 
tice appears to be confirmed. Such then was the custom of 
the x\postle and the other disciples, as recorded in holy writ. 
We now follow their example. My learned opponent has 
Bsksd, if the Bible be the rule of faith and practice, and that we 
are bound to obey it, why do I not wash my brother's feet, as 
commanded by our Lord to do so? Now, I reply, that were I 
In an eastern country, I would do so with readiness. We all 
Rre aware, that in eastern countries, on account of the great 
heat, it is regarded as an act of kindness to assist a guest who 
tnay have travelled from a distance, in takLig off his sandalsi 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 53 

And in presenting water for his feet : but a& this clima e is tem- 
perate, my judgment leads me to suppose, that I am not called 
upon to ** wash the feet of my neighbor." With respect to the 
passages which I quoted from the Apocalypse, I beg to say, tha) 
I did not quote them partially ; the quotations, when consulted, 
will decide. I did not argue from a particular to a universal. 
T merely showed, that there weie distinct commands given for 
writing at least portions of the word of life ; and these com- 
mands are recorded for our instruction. With respect to the 
Clementine edition, I assert, that the Douay version is from the 
Clementine, and that consequently the translators have subjected 
themselves to the penalties imposed by Sixtus. 

My friend has said, that neither he himself, nor scarcely any 
one else believes in the infallihility of the Pope. Need I again 
say, that the Italians believe implicitly in the infallibility of the 
Pope 1 Cardinal Bellarmine says, 

"If the Pope rould or should so far err as to command the practice of vice, 
aiid to forbid virtuous actions, the church were bound to beheve vices to bft 
good, and virtues to be bad ! !" — De Pontiff. Rom. lib. iv, cap. 5. in fin. 

Cardinal Zabarelli informs us, that 

"The Pope can do all things, whatsoever he pleases, even unlawful thing*, 
and is more than God! /" — De Schism. Sui. Serm. Script, p. 70. 

Masonnus says, 

"That the Roman Pontiffs cannot even sin without praise!!" — Lib. :ii. 
Vit. Johanni IX. 

My friend told me, that the divines in the church of Ronje 
are allowed to exercise their private judgment on matters of 
discipline. I am glad to hear it, and I trust the same privilege 
will also be granted to the people. He asks me, how is a poor 
man to decide, when I hand him the Bible, whether it is really 
inspired or not? I briefly answer, vhen I hand the script:nef 
to a person in the humbler walks of life, should he express any 
doubt of their inspiration, I would say to him — "Read this 
blessed volume, and you will discover in it proofs, that il hxs 
come from God." 

I now ask my friend in reply, how is the peasant to examire 
the many ponderous volumes which contain the councils of {he 
church of Rome ? And without such examination, how can he 
truly ascertain the opinions of his church ? This question 
appears to me infinitely more perplexing than that proposed by 
Mr. Maguire. We do not assert that the authorized Bible is 
immaculate, but maintain, that it fully gives *' the mind of the 
spirit," quoad fidem et mores, as to matters of faith and morals. 
We find the Saviour and his Apostles quoting from the Septua- 
gint, which was not immaculate, a circumstance that may lendei 

5* 



54 THE INF \LLIBn.ITY OF 

US satisfied with translations, though not absolutely perfect 
SixtLis speaks not only of Clausua and Periodus^ but also of wi- 
nima particula. Compare the Clementine and Sixtine editions o^ 
the scriptures, and it is clear the Douay doctors considered the 
Clomentine ths better of the two, since that is the edition which 
they have followed. That discrepancies exist between the 
Sixtine and Clementine editions, is a matter of notoriety 
amongst theologians. With respect to justification by fait'p 
alone, he refers to Luther ; but I would refer him to the epistk 
written to the church which he claims as his own, the church of 
Rome. In the third chapter of the Romans, and 20th verse, 
'i is said, ^' We account a man to be justified by faith without 
ti e works of the law." He charges me with denying the im- 
portance of good works. I distinctly assert, that I desire to 
witness the fruits of righteousness universally exhibited ; but I 
hold that the only mode of laying the foundation of morality, is 
io proclaim justification by faith in the Son of God. No other 
doctrine can touch the heart, or withdraw it from the love of the 
world. A Christian lives not to himself, but to him who died 
and rose again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and 
living. Fixing his eye on Calvary, he sees the evidence of his 
own sin, and the redeeming 'mercy of his Saviour. Though 
deeply feeling his own unworthiness, through the blood of Jesus 
he is freed from embarrassing anxiety — and as an adopted son 
— can pour out his soul before him ; for " God so loved the 
•.vorld that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever 
believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life." 
He desires to count all things but loss for the excellency of the 
knowledge of Christ Jesus, and grounds his hopes of accep- 
tance exclusively on his merits. He is enabled, in some humble 
measure, to run in the way of his commandments, because he 
feels himself not to be his own, but Christ's — by creation and 
redemption, purchased by the blood of the Lamb, and therefore 
bound, by interest as well as gratitude, to dedicate himself, 
body, soul, and spirit, to the glory of God, which is his reasona- 
ble service. 

My friend has desired me to point out a passage in the Yul- 
gate, in which there is a single error, or which differs in the 
slightest particular from the originals. I shall refer him to 
the passage in the 11th of Hebrews, where the Apostle says, 
*hat " Jacob worshipped, leaning on the top of his staff," 
iQogexvprjaev em to axgov trjg haviov oaBdov or, as the words are 
in the Vulgate, " adoravit cacumen virgcz ejus,^^ or, in the Douay 
Bible, "adored the top of his rod." St. Jerome does not 
Igree with the interpretation received by the church of Rome. 
— (Qu»s. Hebr. in Genes. Erasm. Edit. vol. vi, p. 228.) Ii 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 55 

proof that the church of Rome has not furnished an authorized 
and immaculate conjmentary, hear the opinion of Dr. Doyle, in 
answer to a question, before the Lord's committee. 

*' You consider yourselves pledged to all matters contained in these notes 1 
—•No, not by any means ; on the contrary, there were notes affixed, I beHeve, 
to the Rheinish Testame-nt, which were most objectionable ; and, on being 
prt^sented to us, we caused them to be expunged. The notes carpy, im 
OUR EDITIONS OF THE BIBLE, NO WEIGHT ; for we do not know the wri^O'lf 
of many of them. If we find them clear enough in explanation of doctriiie, 
fve leave them there ; but whenever we find any thing exceptionable, we put 
them ont, as we have done in the cases I have referred to." — Dr. DoyWi 
Evidence before the House of Lords, p. 222. 

1 assert then, that we have strong proofs against the infalli- 
bility of the church of Rome ; inasmuch as she has not been 

V his to furnish a perfect edition of the scriptures — nor a standard 
«:> mmentary — except we choose to take the unanimous consent 
» the Fathers, as contamed in the numberless and massy 

V dumes that have emanated from their pens ! My friend has 
t{ Iked of a ray of light which would dry up all the streams of 
I rotestant opinion — I wish he would now suffer that ray to 
beam upon us. If he be able to produce such a light, is it not 
uncharitable in my reverend friend to allow us any longer to 
remain in the state of darkness of which he speaks? But my 
friend has also brought forward the numbers attached to his 
church as a proof of her universality. Numbers, permit me to 
say, are no proof of truth. If such, however, be regarded as a 
proof of universality and infallibility, the church of Rome cannot 
be the universal or infallible church. It has been ascertained, 
tliat there are at present seventy-five millions of Protestants, 
and, in addition, fifty millions belonging to the Greek church, 
who also protest against the church of Rome. Now the aggre- 
gate of these is one hundred and twenty-five millions ; while 
the number belonging to the Roman Catholic church amounts 
to but ninety millions. So that we perceive, even in point of 
numbers, this wonderfully infallible and universal church, when 
weighed in the balance, is found wanting. 

Mr. Maguire has asserted, that the Bible is a dumb judge, 
and unable to pronounce — yet we find that the Saviour consid- 
ered it competent to decide : for he again and again appealed 
c the Old Testament scriptures — " Had ye believed Moses, ye 
wo'ild have believed me, for he ivrote of me." 

It is worthy of observation, that Bellarmine (de Conciliis, 1, 
i, ch. 6,) gives us a list of general cowaciXs partly confirmed SLud 
pmrthj rejected; and (in c. 7, and Rom. Pont. 1, iv, c. 11,) ho 
says, that several things in those councils allowed to be general, 
were foisted in by heretics — he knows not how. My learned 
ouDcnent in correct, according to Delahogue, as to the numbers 



66 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

of general councils — but strange to say, Delahogue himsoli 
admits, that there is a division respecting the council of Con« 
Ftance — all Catholics, he observes, confess that as to some of its 
sessions it was ecumenical ; the Italians deny that it was 
ecumenical as to all its sessions, while the French church 
vigorously maintain the directly opposite opinion. — Tract de 
Eccles. p. 451.) 

Again, Delahogue (p. 452,) acknowledges the uncertainty 
t;xisting respecting the 5th Lateran council, and quotes the foU 
lowing passage from Bellarmine: 

" It remains a question among Catholics to the present day, whether tae 
5th Lateran be truly a general Council." — (L. ii, de Cone. c. 13.) 

I beg to remark, that Delahogue must include the council of 
Constance, or the 5th Lateran, in order to complete the number 
of eighteen general councils. And yet with all the assistance 
of an infallible church, he has not told us which of the two he 
has adopted, not having prefixed any number to either. There- 
fore, another infallible tribunal is called for, to determine which 
councils are general, and which are not ; and an infallible 
depository is required to preserve the councils, according to 
Bellarmine, from the interpolations of heretics ! I would ask, 
is it the character of the council which is to decide the ortho- 
doxy of the doctrine, or the orthodoxy of the doctrine the char- 
acter of the council? If the former, who is to decide upon the 
characteristics of a general council 1 If the latter, why is not 
the council of Tyra, held in the 6th century, received as 
general, as well as the first council of Nice — both having been 
summoned by imperial authority? Was not the 5th council 
assembled at Constantinople in despite of the opposition of Pop«; 
Yigilius ? Did not that council condemn as heretical, three 
books, against the express prohibition of Yigilius — the one by 
Ibas, Bishop of Edessa, the other of Theodorus of Mopsuestiv'^., 
ind the other of Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus ? And yet was 
iiot that very council in the end approved of by the successoi.^ 
oi' Yigilius, and, in fine, received throughout all the church as a 
true and ecumenical council ? (Yide Baronium in Justiniano 
et Yigilo, tom. vii, et Sirmundum Praefat, in secund.) All this 
doubt and confusion carry upon them prima facie evidence, thai 
the church of Rome is destitute of infallibility. 

I now solemnly put it to Mr. Maguire's conscience, will he 
Btand to every thing which is decreed in general councils ? I 
am satisfied that he will not. In the 27th canon of the 3rd 
Lateran council, the persecution of heretics is reccmmended. 
It is decreed (3 Lat. council, can. 16,) that "oaths are to b« 
regarded as perjuries which militate against ecclesiastical utilit'^ 
and the institutes ol the holy Fathers." Will Mr. Maguire, I gay, 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 57 

ru\ncl to such decrees ? He cannot ; he will not. What then 
becomes of the infallibiUty of general councils in his estimation] 
Again — we have had contradictions the most opposite. The 
ro.mcil of Constance deposed three Popes and declared the 
papal authority was subject to a council. We may differ about 
the signification of passages in the scripture, but we can appeal 
10 common sense — to the context — or to the analogy of faith — 
but we cannot appeal to an infallible tribunal to decide — for the 
3xist€nce of such a tribunal is the matter in debate. But facts 
can speak — council is against council — Pope against Pope. 
The church of Rome has not yet been able to decide as to the 
si)at of her supposed infallibility ; and, by referring me to the 
unanimous consent of the Fathers to discover the doctrines of 
scripture, bids me to waste my life in wandering through their 
oonderous folios. Facts, such as these, lead me at once to 
conclude, that the church of Rome is not infallible. 

Mr. Maguire — I have first a few words to say in reply to 
Mr. Pope. He has endeavored, but in vain, to get over the 
difi[iculty which I called upon him to solve, namely, how a Pro- 
testant child could receive the Bible as the inspired word of 
God. The child could only receive the scriptures upon the 
private judgment, or the authority of the minister. If he receive 
the scriptures upon that authority, and that such authority be 
recognised by Mr. Pope, then the question is settled. Mr. 
Pope endeavored to illustrate his argument by placing one book 
on the top of another, and he gets out of the circle in which he 
is involved by upsetting both books. I defied Mr. Pope to 
point out an error regarding matters of faith in the Latin Vul- 
gate. He appealed to a passage in Hebrews where he asserts 
•t is said of Jacob, " adoravit cacumen virgae ejus." Now in 
the first place, the quotation is false and the Latin is bad — the 
words are, " fastigium virgae ejus." — The controversy here is 
about the Greek word ^ni. It signifies towards the top of the 
staff, as well as the top of the staff. The latter is the better 
translation — every man who knows Greek, knows the Greek 
word will bear both meanings. This passage has baen very 
My discussed by Dr. Lingard who is fully qualified to sustain 
!t. I can assure the learned gentlemen, that he ir> very far, in 
this instance, from proving the existence of an error m the Latin 
Vulgate. I said that no Catholic is bound to believe in the 
mfalhbility of the pope ; and I re-assert, that it does not from 
an article of Catholic faith. Divines have had, and may still 
have their private quarrels about it. But such differences from 
no breach of communion, as the subject matter in dispute, forma 
no aiiicle of Catholic faith* " Upon this rock'' says oui 



58 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

Saviour, "I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall no 
prevail against her." Here is the infallibility promised by oui 
Lord, and claimed by the Catholic church, and not the infalli- 
biliy of the pope, which my learned adversary would cram 
down the throats of Catholics, " velint nolint" — as an article of 
Catholic faith. 

1 called upon Mr. Pope to produce any ecumenical council 
i^hirh contradicted another in matters of faith. It is strange 
tha\ he should quote what he has quoted regarding the taking of 
an oath. I affirm that everv oath should be taken in truth ana 
justice, and in j idgment. No man should swear to any thing 
for which he has not the evidence of his senses, or a certainty 
approaching to mathematical precision. A person who would 
swear contra statuta patrum^ would not, undoubtedly^ have such 
evidence to sustain his oath. I repeat in the face of the learned 
world, that what Mr. Pope has quoted from the councils, forma 
no part of their decision upon matters of faith. When a council 
decides upon matters of faith, it employs a certain invariable 
form — '' Si guis dixerit,^^ " If any person shall say," &c, — 
" anathema sit^^^ " let him be anathema." When this form is 
employed, the decision is upon an article of faith — I told you 
already there were eighteen ecumenical councils. — Tliey never 
issued an anathema in the above form, where an article of faith 
was not concerned. But, in matters not connected with faith 
or essential morahty, a council may err. The infalhbility of 
general councils extends only to matters of faith and essential 
discipline. The promise which Christ made to his church was, 
that she should never teach error. Our articles of faith are well 
known. I defy any one to produce me a general council which 
<^5.s contradicted another general council in matters of faith. 

Mr. Pope speaks vauntingly of seventy-five millions of Pro- 
testants. W^here are they ? They do not exist — unless, indeed, 
you collect under the broad standard of Protestantism many 
sects, who differ more from each other than I do from my friend, 
Mr. Pope. I ask, when you separate all those jarring sects, 
where are the millions of whom Mr. Pope speaks, with all the 
urtifice of a practised rhetorician 1 But Mr. Pope would rather 
^muse us with powerful declamation, than descend to the vulgar 
level of argument. Is it honourable to adduce against me liic 
Arian council of Basil? Is the Catholic church to be account- 
able for the conduct of those whom she had formally excommu- 
nicated ? I have proved, that in the Catholic church exists the 
authority to put down error. Other churches tolerate a super- 
ficial conformity, and introduce into their bosoms vipers that will 
gnaw their very vitals. See how the Puritans overturned thr 
f stabliahed church, and kicked out ihe bishops of Scotland. Il 



THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH 59 

18 contiary to the spirit of th(.- Piotestant church to condemn 
en or, and yet she retains the Athanasiau creed, which proves 
that m her nature she is not tolerant. But she prudently 
exhibits this species of toleration, for otherwise her churches 
would be deserted, and the conventicles crowded to excess. If 
the king of England has no choice, but must remain a Protes- 
tant ''f the church of England, is not that a betrayal of con- 
sciencn, and an inroad upon the exercise of private judgm-.nt? 
Is the Athanasian creed characteristic of that toleration of which 
the church of England boasts ? The man who swears against 
the doctrines of the Catholic church perjures himself, as the 
council of Lateran declares. For it is not possible he can be 
certain that the oath he takes is true. How can any man 
swear, that the doctrines of the Catholic church are damnable 
and idolatrous ? The oath is not that he believes them so, but 
that they are so for fact. 

The declaration of his majesty, prefixed to the homilies, 
declares, that the thirty-nine articles of the church of England 
contain all things necessary ; and it strictly prohibits all differ- 
ences from them : *' we will not allow (i-t says) the least devia- 
tion.'* The church of England, then, is not a particle more 
tolerant than the church of Rome, though it evinces a great 
variance in its practice. If the Protestant clergyman believes 
that a church has been established by Christ, he should uphold 
it — if he does not believe so, why should punishment be inflicted 
on those who separate from the communion of the church of 
England ? Ought not the Protestant clergyman contend agaiiist 
those who rise in opposition to that church ? If they be .he 
"iccessors of St. Peter, and if the Holy Ghost has endow^ed 
i/ieir church with the spirit of grace, as they would make ua 
believe, she should exercise her authority, and not give the 
sanction of her name to every spawn of the innumerable sects 
that range themselves under the banner of Protestantism. 
Johanna Southcote exercised the right of private judgmen*^ 
when she announced herself as pregnant with the Messiah. 
Every man of sense must allow, that by private judgment we 
never can prove the inspiration of the scriptures. Why then 
will Mr. Pope not receive them upon the authority of the Catho- 
lic church, instead of resorting to the authority of frail and falli- 
ble man ? 

I asserted that Christ never gave a positive command to write 
the New Testament. If St. John, at Patmos, M^as ordered to 
V -"ite to particular churches, that does not by any means prove 
thai a special command was given by our Saviour that the New 
Testament should be written, particularly as St. John wrote 
about facts, and not about doctrines to those particular churches. 



60 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 

The truth is, nearly sixty years had elapsed from the death o' 
Christ till the last of tlie New Testament was written. Wen 
the people of God left in the meantime without a rule of faith 
to guide and to direct them? Was it not the Roman Catholic 
church that converted these islands from paganism — missiona- 
ries sent from Rome to England rescued that land from idolatry 
and paganism. The Christian church was cemented in the tirsS 
ages with the blood of martyrs — thirty-four Popes in succeesioB 
after St. Peter became martyrs for the faith of Jesus Christ. 
Forty-five others are canonized saints — Protestants also have 
their saints ; and churches are dedicated to saints. I may t^rs 
in passing, remark, ttiat Catholics do not worship the saints — it 
is a rank calumny, invented in order to fling dust into the eyea 
of the multitude. 

Mr. Pope has not yet attempted to answer my direct argu- 
ment, both from scripture and the holy Fathers — he has indeed 
advanced, and the task was an easy one, several captious objec- 
tions. If a Catholic happens not to know the history of every 
general council which has been held, the conclusion drawn from 
such premises by Mr. Pope is, that the church of Christ is 
proved not to be infallible. Has Mr. Pope quoted any texts of 
scripture, direct, plain, and obvious, like those I adduced 1 I 
have here more than seventy passages from the Fathers upca 
the subject, and I would read them to you if the time permitted. 
In one of them the church is compared to the ark of Noah, ou\i 
of which no one shall be saved. I deny that we look upon al! 
Protestants as heretics — we consider Arius, Luther, Calvin, &c. 
who have separated directly from the church, as heretics. But, 
as St. Augustin says, we do not consider the children or de- 
scendants of heretics, as formal heretics, unless they remain 
obstinate and contumacious in their errors. I am opposed to 
the doctrine of the Pope's infallibility. It is imposed upon me 
by Mr. Pope — but I have already stated that it forms no part ot 
the doctrine of the Catholic church, and is not received by the 
Catholics throughout the world. I may conclude this day'e 
discussion by again asserting that Christ promised he would l» 
with his church teiching, preaching and baptizing until V ^ cor 
summation of the world — my scripture proofs th^^reforf i^" 
untouchad. 



THE DIVINE RIGHT Or rn.» IE JUDGMENT. t>^ 

SecOiNd Day. — Friday, April 20. 



SUBJECT. — Th^ Divine Right of frivate Judgment to prv^ 
nounce upon the AutherAicity, Integrity, and Canonicity oj 
Scripture, and to determine its meaning in Articles of Faith, 

\t eleven o'clock the Chair was taken by Daniel U'Con- 
H ?i,L, Esq. and Ad3iiral Oliver. 

Mr. Maguire rose, and called on Mr. Pope for proofs lo 
sustain his rule of faith, which he (Mr. Maguirp) ur^Jcisiooa lo 
mean private judgment. 

Mr. Pope — I shall preface my observations this day, by 
assuring the present meeting, that I was under thft fu" Cuuvic- 
tion, that I should yesterday have had an opportunity of replying 
to Mr. Maguire's last speech. Mr. Maguire spoke six times, 
while my addresses were but five in number. In justice, 
therefore, the right of reply was vested in me : but as the chair- 
men were divided on the point, and as I felt that iiiy aigumenis 
against the infallibility of the church of Rome had been cogent 
and satisfactory, I waved my privilege. I cannot avoid noticing 
the bold, and, I must say, unfounded assertion of my opponent 
that I did not touch one of his argunjents. Gentlemen, you will 
decide on that question. I regret that it is the fashion of man ^ 
advocates of the church of Rome* to substitute barefaced asser 
lion and high-sounding language for solid argument. 

With respect to the proofs of the right of private judgment, I 
shall first adduce negative evidence. If there be no infalhble 
tribunal, man is under the necessity of exercising his judgment. 
I shall therefore make (partly in reply to Mr. Maguire) some 
remarks on the infallibility of the church of Rome. And first 
I beg to say, that Mr. Maguire has not proved that the church of 
Rome is the church of Christ. The passages, I maintain, which 
he adduces from scripture, do not demonstrate the infallibility of 
%ny church — much less the infallibity of the church of Rome. 

It is remarkable, that the church of Rome, which has defined 
©very thing, has never given a definition of herself! In the 
conferences previous to the decrees of the eleventh session oi 
the council of Trent, Tincent Lunello, a Franciscan friar, pro- 
posed that a definition )f the church and her authority should 
precede the declarations of the disputed points of doctrine. 
The motiom was rejected. — (Sarpi's History of the Council of 
Trent, 1. iL, p. 155, Geneva, 16^5.) If the church has dg< 

6 



62 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

defined herself, how are her votaries to discover the source from 
which they are to derive their opinions. Mr. Maguire also 
admitted, if I mistake not, that in the primitive ages the church 
of Rome was not looked upon as the Cathe^lic church. 

In reference to Matt, v, 13. — " But if the salt has lost its 
STivor," &c. I beg to observe, that Maundrell in his travels, 
espressly mentions, that 

"In the Valley of Salt, near Gebul, and about four hours' journey from 
Aleppo, there is a small precipice, occasioned by the continual taking away 
ftf the salt. In this, says he, you may see how the veins of it lie : I broke a 
jiete of it, of which the part exposed to the rain, sun, and air, though it had 
*e sparks ».\r>J particles of salt, yet had perfectly lost its savor, as in Matt, v." 

Again — there was an asphaltic substance, which was used by 
ihe Jews to saK their sacrifices, and which, if kept too long, lost 
lis flavour, an(i was thrown upon the floor of the Temple to 
orevent the Priests' slipping. Hence the allusion — " Trodden 
binder foot of mmy These observj^tions will, I trust, serve to 
*fiow that the Sanour iyi the passage which we are consideritig, 
^ouid not have aduded to the infallibility of the Apostles. 

Does my friend mean to say, that the Sixtine and Clementine 
editions do not vary in minima particuk ? I have a work no\^ 
oefore me, " Hornets Iut»odaction to tho Study of the Scrip- 
•rtires," in which ne gives us a specimen of the discrepancies 
trxisting between the Oieiiiontine and Sixtine editions. As to 
vacob worshipping the to{> \jf his rod, as the Douay Testament 
nas it, I beg to observe, that vhe Apostle Paul quoted from the 
»§eptuagint. The original Hebirew word in the 47th of Genesis 
and 31st verse, to which St. Piiul refers, according to the dif- 
ferent pointing, signifies both " a ft/d and a bed." The Douay 
Bible translates the passage (Gen. \lvii, 31,) thus : " And he 
A/aid, swear thou to me. And as he was swearing, Israel aiorea 
God^ TURNING TO the bed's head.^'' The scholars, howeV'?r, 
can at once decide, whether "Jacob adored the top of his rod" 
IS not a gross mistranslation of the origiiial text. 

Mr. Maguire insinuated that the canons of the third count.il 
of Lateran, (27 and 16,) relative to ihe persecution of heretics, 
and to oaths which militate against ecclesiastical utility, are 
matters of discipline ; but I insist that they relate to morals- - 
^* pertinent ad mores,^^ We all know, how Jesuits and other j 
interpret " Ecclesiastical utility." 

It is a remarkable fact, that the pope may bvJ the sole author 
of the canons of a council. Dupin, in reference to the 70 
canons passed in the fourth or great Lateran council, (vol. ii 
p. 449,) writes, 

" Matthew Paris says, that these canons seemed tolerable to some of tLi 
pielates, but grievous to others. His words are these, ' Facto prius cb ijm 



OF PRIVATR JLDCMENT. 62 

fipa exhortationis sermcne, recitata .sunt in pleno concilio capitula septuaginia^ 
q\KB aliis placahilia, aliis videbantur onerosa^ Let the case be how it will, it 
is certain, that these canons were not made by the council but by Innocent 
fil, who presented them to the council ready drawn up, ami ordered trem c 
be read ; and that the prelates did not enter into any debate upon theia ju. 
.hat their silence was taken for an approbation." 

Is it not evident, therefore, that the canons were forced u^oii 
/he council by Pope Innocent IIH 

The Rev. Dr. Murray, in his examination before the Com. 
non's committee, p. 223, when asked, 

" Will you be so good as to explain the nature of the authority of the Pope?" 
replied, "he is the executive power of the church ; his office is to enforce .he 
observance of the canons." 

I would remark, that the Pope possesses also a dispensing 
power. — The Maynooth class-book informs us, 

" That the Pope may, according to circumstances, dispense even with the 
aws of a general council, whenever a legitimate cause shall arise." — P. 360. 

Mr. Butler states, 

"That, m the opinion of all Roman Catholics, it belongs to the Pope in 
extraordinary cases to act in opposition to the canons." 

Do not these statements sufficiently demonstrate the supreme 
sower exercised by the Pope, both in council and out of council? 

Mr. Maguire was offended by my reference to the council of 
Basil, i ask, was the council of Basil ever regarded as a 
general council? Bellarmine (de Eccles. Milit. c. 16.) remarks, 

" That the council of Basil was at first a true ecumenical council and 
infallible, but afterwards became a schismatical conventicle, and of no au- 
thority at all !" 

Again, Bellarmine says, (De Roman. Pont. 1. ii, c. 11.) 

" The council of Basil, by common consent, and with the legate's concur 
rence, concluded that a council is above the Pope, which is now rightly 
'udged erroneous." 

It is a fact, that there is no standard of the Roman Catholic 
faith in general use in this country. Dr. Doyle, speaking on 
Ihis subject, says, 

"Besides the articles enumerated in the creed of Pius the fourth, there are 
others to be received as of faith. These are defined in the sacred canons, of 
which some are received entire, some in part, and of which no account can 
be obtained from the formularies to which the Roman Catholic bishops have 
referred to as authentic."- Dr. Doyle's Evidence before the House of Lords, p. 1 80. 

So much for Dr. Doyle's opinion upon the subject. 

As we have seen that great uncertainty exists with respect to 
general councils, I ask again, (as Mr. Maguire has not solved 
the question) whether the character of the council is to decid« 
the orthodoxy of the doctrine, or the orthodoxy of the doctnnfi 
to decide the character of the council ? If the former, who is iQ 



54 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

decide upon the characteristics of a general council? If th 
orthodoxy of the doctrine is to decide the character of th 
council, why is not the council of Tyre, held A. 13. 535 
received as general, as well as the first of Nice, both having 
been alike called by imperial authority? Mr. Maguire has tolc* 
us, that a council approved by the Pope is infallible. Then thfe 
decrees were fallible before the Pope confirmed them. Foi 
instance, the decrees of the council of Trent were fallible, unti 
they received the sanction of the representatives of the Pope at 
*he council ? It is admitted, that a council without the Pope i3 
faUiblo, and that the Pope per se is also fallible. Again Ptlr. 
Maguire remarks, that the decrees of the Pope, assisted by a 
'ew bishops are infallible, when " received by the universal 
church." I am desirous of knowing what is the meaning of 
" the universal church.'' I presume that it signifies the Roman 
Catholic hierarchies in Ireland, in Spain, and elsewhere. These 
bodies are confessedly fallible. I wish then to know by wha 
process decrees set forth hy fallible authority become infallible 
when received by fallible bodies of men. Again, Bellarmine 
speaks of general councils, which are to be altogether rejected 
and of general councils partly to be received and partly to be 
rejected ; and also remarks that several things in councils 
allowed to be general, were foisted in by heretics. We musi 
therefore have another infallible tribunal to decide, what coun- 
cils are really general, and what passages in them are the inter- 
polations of heretics ! Some councils, according to Delahogue, 
are but partially received in some countries, and wholly admitted 
in others. For instance, that of Constance. Some doubt of 
the ecumenicity of the first council of Lyons. (Delahogue, p. 
448.) The fifth Lateran council has been doubted of, accord- 
ing to Bellarmine, non quasdam sessiones, not as to some ses- 
sions, but in toto, altogether. 

Further — If I admit the church of Rome to be infallible, then 
I must acknowledge its decisions as divine. But two divine 
traditions, which must necessarily come from the same source, 
cannot possibly contradict each other : yet the second council 
of Lateran (Can. 6.) prohibits the marriage of ecclesiastics, on 
the ground of immutable and inherent holiness. The canon 
remarks — 

" When they ought both to be, and to be called the temple of God, the 
iressels of the Lord, the shrine of the Holy Ghost, it is unworthy that thei 
ihould become the slaves of chambering and imcleanness." 

Such is the language in which the council speaks of marriage. 
But what says the scriptures 1 

** Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled, but whoremTnaei* 
und adulterers God will judge." Heb. xiii, 4. 



OF PRHATE JUDGMENT. 65 

On this subject the Bible is directly at issue with the church 
of Rome, therefore she cannot be infallible. — Again, permit me 
to ask, were I to grant for the moment, that the church of Romo 
is infallible — is there not much danger, les n?istakes should 
o< cur in the interpretation of the meaning of her councils] 

We have argued on the claims of the church of Rome to 
infallibility. I have appealed to scripture, reason, common sense, 
and facts. How shall we decide, whether Mr. Maguire's opinion 
on the subject, or mine, be correct? If I find a church contra^ 
dieting itself, I have prima-facie evidence that she is fallible. — 
The council of Constance deposed three Popes, who attempted 
to sit together in the chair of St. Peter (which was well nigh 
broken, as Fuller says,) and appointed another Pope. On the 
other hand, the council of Florence and Trent have raised the 
authority of the Pope above a council. Here is a palpable 
contradiction on the authority of the Pope. — Again, the counci) 
of Ephesus decreed — 

" That it should not be lawful to utter, write, or compose any other faith 
than that which had been denned by the Nicene Fathers ; and that, if any darec 
to offer any other creed, if ecclesiastics ^ they should be removed from their offta 
(dienos esse; if laics, that they shoxdd be anathematized.^^ — (Labb. et Cosa. 
Cone. torn, iii, p. 668.) 

Here you observe that the counci] of Ephesus deposed 
ecclesiastics and anathematized laics who should compose any 
other faith than that which has been defined by the Nicene 
Fathers. Compare the JVicene Creed with that of Pope Pius, 
and you will find the latter differing from the former in many 
particulars, and containing many articles not to be found in the 
Nicene Creed. I, therefore, without hesitation conclude, that 
we have "the church" of one ag^e contradictino^ "the church" 
of another age. Again — the second Nicene council declares, 
hat one reason for worshipping the image of Christ is, that he is 
.lot sensibly present with us, but only in his Divinity ; — Act iv, 
p. 305. And the epistle of Germanus, received by the council, 
says, that he is not present " aaj,««T^xwg" bodily. It also anathe 
malizes all who assert thai Christ was not circumscribed as to hih 
humanity, I ask, are not these opinions plainly opposed to the 
doctrine of transubstantiation ? But the church of Rome now 
receives the doctrine of transubstantiation. Again, therefore, 
we have "the church" of one age against "the church" of 
another age. Let these contradictions go before the world, and 
that world will come to the conclusion that the church of Rome 
is not infallible. Believe me, it is this claim to infallibiiity, which 
will give the death-blow to the church of Rome. She dares not 
alter a single tenet ; her doctrines are written as with a diamond 
■^ -they are engraven on tables of brass, and she canna reforur 

6* 



68 THE 2iVINE RICHT 

I therefore repuat that her vain assumption of hi^ bihty will, ik 
de dispensations of Pr">vidence, give her the death-blow b^ 
which she shall fall. If then, there be no infallible tribunaJ in 
existence, must we not hi under the necessity of exercising ouj: 
^r^^'.rci^ judgments. 

i^^hen we talk of the right of private judgment, it should be 
understood that we mean no^ that every man is justified in putting 
any explanation that fanc} may suggest on the word of God. 
— We must exercise our judgments as accountable beings, 
according to the rules of common sense, and the a':>alogy of 
scripture, with due submission to the moral restraints arising 
from the opinions of men of sound understanding and piety. — 
Do we say that a man who exercises his judgment on the con- 
tents of any work which he may peruse, is justified in adopting 
the idle imaginations of his own brain as the meaning of the 
author ? No — we instantly i eject such an absurd opinion. But 
in reading the scriptures we are not only to exercise our judgment 
with the same care which we would bestow upon other volumes, 
but as beings accountable to God^ and as deeply interested in the 
concerns of an eternal world. These are considerations by which 
a man is solemnly called upon to exercise his judgment upon 
the subject-matter of the inspired records — these are rules by 
which, I conceive, he is to be guided in that exercise. The 
misinterpretation of the law of the land is no justification for 
the commission of illegal acts ; nor will the misunderstanding 
of God's blessed word, on the great fundamental truths of the 
Christian system, afford any security to error, but will expose 
us to the wrath of the great Eternal. I now come to my direct 
proofs of the right of private judgment. Truly it is an extra- 
ordinary question ; Am I justified in employing my intellectual 
faculties ? Why are faculties bestowed on men, if they are not 
to be exercised? If I am not to exercise them, is not my 
accountability destr.> /-ed ? The church of Rome must allow 
Der own votaries to exercise their private judgment on ihe proof s 
of her authority. They must lay the foundation of their system 
on private judgment ; and if they can lay the foundation, why 
should they not be competent to raise the superstructure ? If 
they must exai. ^ne the basis, why should they not be allowed to 
exercise their fi- culties upoa the nature of the edifice which rests 
upon it? Relgion is a personal matter, "^t is written in the 
5^'ord of God : 

" Every man shall bear his own burden." — Gal. vi, 6. 
"Every one of us shall render an account to God Jor Aimsc//."— Rom, 
iiv, 12. 

The idea of an infallible tribunal requires me to give up the 

exercise of my faculties, in opposition to the natural <5onstitutioy 



or PRIVATE JUDGMENT 61 

©f the humap. mind. I cannot believe any thing, except on 
evidence. Who formed the mind? The Deity. If the exercise 
of my judgment, therefore, coincides with the natural constitution 
of the mind, then to exercise that judt^jment must be my noble 
prerogative — must be my bounden duty. Gentlemen, put 
together these observations, and you cannot avoid coming to the 
plain and evident conclusion, that there is no infallible tribunal 
Aie we not, therefore, thrown back upon our own judgments . 
\^ eigh the considerations in subservience to which the judgment 
should be exercised — the moral accountability of man, the voice 
of common sense and reason — and will you not join issue with 
me, and assert, that the exercise of private judgment is the birth- 
right of every son and daughter of Adam 1 

[J\Iy\ O'Connell being obliged to retire upon 'professional business^ the Chair 
was taken in his stead by Mr. Hugh 0^ Connor.] 

Mr. Maguire. — Mr. Pope has commenced by making a 
very long complaint that he had it not in his power to reply to 
me yesterday evening. It was decided by the chair that he had 
no right to reply ; and if the time specified in the regulations 
was expired, wiiy should he make the demand ? By what magic 
could he transfer that right to himself, when chance gave me the 
opportunity of speaking last? With regard to what has been 
advanced by Mr. Pope from Fra Paolo, respecting the council 
of Trent, I at once deny the authority of such a man. Mr. 
Pope introduced yesterday much irrelevant matter, which had 
nothing to do with the question of the infallibility of the church 
of Rome ; and this day he has advanced but one or two reasons 
for the faith which he himself professes. He says, that I have 
not PjVoved my church to be the church of Christ; I already 
said, that the question, then before us was, not whether the 
Catholic church was the church of Christ, but whether Christ 
had established a church on earth, and endowed it with the pre- 
rogative of infallibility'? The Protestant churches, divided as 
they are upon the most essential points, can lay no claim to 
infallibility. But one church claims to be infallible, and but one 
church possesses any pretensions to the title. No other church 
has even the semblance or outward appearance of infallibility. 
To prove that Christ established an infaUible church, I quoted 
'^rious texts of scripture. Mr. Pope seemed either to be afraid 
r ashanried to recur to scripture on the subject of private 
judgment. I showed yesterday that what was meant by the 
church of Christ, was all the churches in the world holding 
communion with the See of Rome, which was deemed the 
mother and matrice of all Christian churches, as St. Cyprian 
calls it. All the oburches m that communion form lie gf^nem 



68 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

term of the church of Christ. Mr. Pope again emieavoured to 
draw a distinction between the Catholic church and the church 
of Rome, I have already shown the term Roman was applied 
to the Catholic church in order to distinguish her from the 
churches which the heretics set up in opposition. The Deists, 
no doubt, will feel obliged to Mr. Pope for the argument he has 
advanced relative to the salt. This argument was most vaunt 
ingly put forward by Voltaire against the Divinity of Christy and 
the infallibility of his Apostles. That celebrated infidel, with 
blasphemous flippancy, declared, that Christ was a great block- 
head to compare his Apostles to the salt of the earth, as at 
argument of their infallibility, and undertook to prove that the 
salt can lose its essence, and consequently that Christ wai 
ignorant of chemistry^ and his Apostles, by their Master's own 
comparison, proved to be fallible. But his shallow and ridiculou:< 
arguments were triumphantly refuted by Christian divines. 
Now, if Mr. Pope can demonstrate that salt may lose its 
savor, he will establish a position equally fatal to the infallibility 
of the Apostles, and to the divinity of Christ himself Thus 
will he elfectuate a cordial union between the representative^, 
of Voltaire and the followers of the Rev. Mr. PDpe. CatholinG. 
however, despise the argument of the refined blasphemer, tr 
prove that salt may be decomposed, and abhor the system (c. 
which its origin is traced. — The Catholic has no need to exami] le 
the definitions of general councils — there are few indeed wbo 
could accomplish that task, If he be once satisfied that tie 
church of Christ cannot lead him into error^ he, like St. Augusti/i, 
rests with security his faith upon her authority. She proposes 
the dogmas — he readily gives his assent. Now, in order to 
convince himself of the infallibility of his church, he has only to 
refer to the scripture. He finds multiplied in the sacred volume 
evident promises, which, if they prove not infallibility, are words 
ivithout meaning or substance. Christ says to his Apostle. 

"Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates 
af hell shall not prevail against it." — Matt, xvi, 18. 

"The church is the pillar and the ground of truth." — 1 Tim. iii, 15. 

"He that does not hear the church, let him be to thee as the Heathen and 
the Publican."— Matt, xviii, 18. 

" I will send you the Spirit of Truth, to teach you all truth." — John xvi, 13^ 

" I will send you another Paraclete, to abide with you for ever." — Johl 
jdv, 16. 

"I shall be with you all days, even to the end of the world," — Matt 
Kxviii, 20. 

If the Roman Catholic be not convinced from those texts ttiat 
Christ has established an unerring church to guide the ignorant, 
and to whom her children are bound to yield obedience, I desire 
to know how can private judgment enable him to decide upon eihf^ 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 6S 

texts of scripture, not half so strong, and assuredly not h%lf so 
obvious, 

Mr. Pope says, that all Reman Catholics must examine vi.e 
various councils of his church before he can prudently mak'^- an 
act of faith. The reverse, however, is true. Mr. Pope might 
just as well assert, that the lower order of Protestants should 
not doubt of CathoUc faith, unless they were able to prove from 
the acts of council that the Catholic church is not infallible ; and 
thits I imagine, he will scarcely admit. The faith of Ronnan 
Catholics rest upon the promises of Jesus Christ to his church, 
which promises they conceive are sufficiently explicit to satisfy 
the most sceptic mind. Tt is easier for a Catholic to ascertain 
this simple truth, viz: — Did Christ promise that his church shoula 
not fail 1 — than for a Protestant to inquire and scrupulously 
examine into every doubt, and difficulty, and argument. The 
private judgment of the ignorant Catholic leads him to yield his 
assent to the authority of that church which has formed the largest 
society of Christians since the coming of the Messiah. And 
when he adds to the authority of this church, the corresponding 
authority of the Greek church, which differs from his own in no 
article of faith, save the procession of the Holy Ghost, he feels 
his motives of credibility confirmed, and recognizes a safeguard 
for his own conscious ignorance. On the contrary, how can 
illiterate Protestants, thousands of whom cannot even read, 
ascertain whether the New Testament be an inspired work? 
whether such a text were spoken by Christ himself, or by an 
inspired disciple ] Is every ignorant peasant able to know that 
any particular book of scripture is inspired by the Holy Ghost? 
^an the lower order of Protestants, [and it was for the poor 
fifecially that Christ instituted his church) — can the ignorant and 
illiterate amongst the Protestants, who cannot have recourse to 
the authority of that church to which Christ gave the deposit of 
faith — that church which, in what is called the dark ages, lehen a 
single Protestant was not to he heard of, preserved the copies of the 
Bible, and that noble translation which St. Jerome accomplished, 
fourteen centuries before the Reformation — I ask, will the humble 
Protestant, when deprived of such assistance, be able to prove the 
word of God ? If not, and it is plain he cannot, then ' vana est 
praedicatio vestra, vana fides ejus' — ' vain is your preaching, and 
vain his faith.' As soon as the Roman Catholic ascertains the 
true marks of Christ's church, and finds those marks to belong 
exclusively to the Catholic church, he is at onre satisfied — he 
believes it is inspired by the Holy Ghost, and he rests firm in 
his faith. The Catholic church has remained for 1800 years- 
it has defied all the efforts of persecution — it has survived the 
ik^eck and shcMsks of time, and will defy> till the erd of the worl4 



70 I'HE DIVINE RIGHT 

r11 the heretics^ who may rise in opposition to it. This povei 
that is upheld by the finger of God alone. 

Mr. Pope has said, that Innocent the Third forced the canons 
upon the third Lateran council. He brought them ready framed 
to the council, and because, after they were debated^ they were 
approved of by the council, therefore he is to be considered as 
having forced them on the council. Aci ording to this rule, any 
one who should originate or introduce a measure in the House 
of Commons that might afterwards happen to be passed into a 
iaw, should be considered as having forced it on the house, 
though the measure had been regularly debated and approved 
of. It might as well be said that the regulations for this meeting, 
which had been framed by Messrs. Lawless and Singer, and 
which were subsequently approved of by us, had been forced 
upon us by them. 

Mr. Pope's assertion, that the Pope is able to dispense with 
the decrees of councils, is an unworthy quibble. He quotes 
Delahogue to prove that the Pope has the power of dispensing 
with the canons of councils, but these are canons which relate 
to mere discipline. The council of Trent, for example, decreed 
that no persons should marry within four degrees of kindred; 
yet every bishop can dispense in that degree of consanguinity. 
I have already explained to you, that the decrees of councils in 
matters of discipline are not unalterable ; but they are immutable 
in matters which regard the deposit of faith. It would be foolish 
and ridiculous to contend that the head of the church should not 
have it in his power to dispense with the rules and regulations 
of discipline which may be enacted from time to time, and prove 
expedient or otherwise according to circumstances. The Pope 
is able to dispense with the ecclesiastical law ; but neither the 
Pope jior a general council can change an article of faith. I 
here challenge Mr. Pope to show me where any one of the 
eighteen ecumenical councils differs from the remainder in a 
single particle connected with faith ; I have already defied him 
to do so, and he has not been able to discover a scintilla of 
difference between them in matters of faith. He has had 
recourse to the council of Basil ; that council was, at first, 
regularly convened by the Pope, but when it had assembled to 
determine upon doctrine, the emperor introduced into it a phalanx 
of Arian bishops. The orthodox bishops refused to sit with 
them, and adjourned to another place. The Arian bishops 
proceeded to hold their cabaK and is^sued their decrees, and 
fulminated censures agains the orthodox bishops. The council 
was ecumenical in the commencement of its sitting, but it was 
forced to adjourn on account of the rabble of Anans iRtroduc»<J 
by the emperor. 



OP PRIVATE JUDGMENT. "/ \ 

Mr. Pope asserts, that Dr. Doyle deems the notes appendv;d 
lo the Bible of no effect. Mr. Pope is under a palpable mistake 
with regard to the commentaries affixed to the Bible. I^o 
Catholic is called upon to agree with those notes, only as fai 
as his private judgment may lead him to do so. We are not 
inimical to the exercise of private judgment, where matters ol 
faith are not concerned or endangered. We are allowed to 
exercise our private judgment in other matters. Does it foho^ , 
because we acknowledge an infallible authority to decide jpo i 
matters of doctrine^ that that authority should bind us down ii 
other matters, and de'oree, for example, at what particular time- 
or place we should breakfast or dine ? The notes appended to 
the Bible are merely intended to explain to the ignorant, matters 
relating to faith and morality, which, of themselves, they are 
unable to explain. They are intended to guide^ not to lead the 
judgment, and to assist the ignorant and unlettered. There are 
copious notes and commentaries to the Protestant Bible. I^ 
private judgment be their sole rule of faith^ why are Protestants 
obliged to have notes and comments ] If they be found useful 
to the Protestant, why should they not be equally useful to the 
Catholic, who admits an infallible authority in matters of faith, 
but who can exercise his private judgment in matters unconnected 
with faith? Mr. Pope has again told you that we have nu 
authorized version of the scriptures. I have already shown you 
that we have such a version. I defy him to prove the ^Vulgate* 
corrupt. He has not, he could not ; yet he repeats the assertion 
And if Mr. Pope's edition of the Bible be deemed a regular and 
genuine one, i contend that ours is ten times more so. I insist, 
that of all editions of the Bible, ours is the best. There may 
be found some verbal inaccuracies — in that respect I do not say 
it is immaculate. We have the Latin Vulgate, the genuine 
translation of the Bible, made by St. Jerome, 1400 years before 
Luther or Calvin were heard of. Mr. Pope inquires how we 
can ascertain when a general council is regularly convened. Tt 
is as easy to ascertain that matter, as it is when our British 
Parliament is regularly convened. When the head of the 
Catholic church regularly convenes a sufficient number of 
bishops, that assemblage morally represents the church, and its 
decrees are admitted by Roman Catholics as decrees of a 
general council. When the council met at Jerusalem to decide 
upon circumcision, they gave us an examplar of a council — " it 
appeared good to the Holy Ghost and to us." I never asserted, 
ihat if the Pope approves of the decrees of a council, tliey are 
therefore infallible. That is contrary to Catholic doctrine. 
What I asserted was, that if the decrees of a council, though 
not a general one, be admitted by the church disperse *beq 



72 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

they are infallible. When a general council was regiilanjf 
convened by the Pope, and when no violence was attempted tc 
influence or overawe it by Arian emperors, then we look upon 
it as the collective body of the church, which decides according 
to the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. Mr. Pope asks what is 
he CatA)olic church? It is formed of all the Christian churches 
throughout the world, in communion with the See of Rome, 
which is the matrice of Christianity, as St. Cyprian called it. 
8t. Jerome, writing to Pope Damasus, says — 

" From a pastor I beg the defence of a sheep. I speak to the fishej man'i 
successor, and to the disciple of the cross — acknowledging none but Christ 
to be chief. I am j, lined in communion with your hohness — that is with the 
chair of Peter: upoi this rock I know the church was built. To thee I 
know were given tho keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever gathereth 
not with thee scattereth," &c 

Mr. Pope has recurred to the council of Constance, which 
deposed three Popes. Now, the facts of the case are the 
strongest proof that Christ watches over his church. One Pope 
having been regularly elected, another was thrust into his place 
through the cabal of secular power, and the real Pope driven 
into banishment where he died. The survivmg Pope was then 
approved of, lest a schism should be created in the church. 
The contest continued for forty years. The Pope regularly 
elected by the cardinals was looked upon as the real and true 
Pope. The other two Popes were called upon to resign by the 
council, and submitted to the sentence rather than distract the 
peace of the church. Could there be a clearer proof that Christ 
has always continued to watch over his church, 

Mr. Pope rose and said — I really regret to be obliged to say, 
ihat there has been either misconception or misrepresentation 
on the part of my learned friend. What I have advanced as to 
the uncertainty of Ccjncils, has not been built on Father Paul's 
History of the Council of Trent, but on the testimony of Dela- 
hogue, in his " Tractatus de Ecclesia,'' (which is the manual 
of the college of Maynooth,) and upon the authority of cardinal 
B?'armine. Mr. Maguire says, that I have brought forward 
^■j contradictions. Is this the case ? When we find one council 
« ^ osing three Popes as anti-popes, and setting up another in 
1 eir place, and the power of a coi<i^cil over the Pope, practi- 
^•^aily recognized in the approval of the measure by the general 
church of Rome ; and when the councils of Trent and Florence, 
on the other hand, decree that the Pope is above a ^.-ouncil — is 
there not council against council ? Again — all whf tc^ed to the 
\icene creed, weie condemned by the council a Ephesus; 
^tiie the creed of Pope Pius, which contains vcA^^y articles ol 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. M 

faith, no- to be found in the Nicene creed, is received by tnc 
rhurch of Rome. Here then is "the church" of one age 
against '* the church" of another. The second Nicene council 
assigned as a reason for the worship of images, that Christ i3 
not sensibly present on earth, but only in his divinity ; and the 
epistle of Germanus, received by that council, asserts, that 
Christ is not present with us '* bodily.^^ It also anathematized 
all who declare, that Christ was not circumscribed as to his 
humanity. Are not these declarations opposed to the doctrine 
of transubstantiation ; and do they not prove that " the church" 
ol one age has contradicted " the church" of another ? 

My opponent has said, that 1 am afraid to meet him on the 
grounds of scripture. I should rejoice, if we coniined ourselves 
to the law and to the testimony. In appealing to Fathers, 
councils, and ecclesiastical writers, I am departing from my own 
ground. If I weigh the church of Rome in " Divine Balance," 
as St. Augustin calls the sacred scriptures, (De Bapt. cont. 
Donat. I. ii. c. 6,) the scale in which the church of Rome might 
happen lo be placed, would s-oon be raised aloft. With respect 
to Judas, I stated that he was one to whom the Lord addressed 
the words, " Ye are the salt of the earth," in evidence that he 
did not thereby intend to describe the infallibility of the Apostles. 
Far be it from me to deny, that the Apostles were infallible. As 
to the expression " the pillar and ground of truth," I would ask, 
v^hen Basil, (in his 70th epistle) speaking of the persecution of 
tlie churches in Cappadocia calls them " pillars and ground of 
truth," did he mean to say that each church was infallible 1 As 
*.o my friend's justification of the conduct of Pope Innocent at 
"be Lateran council, he should remember, that although ministers 
^'ten bring bills into Parliament, yet are the bills discussed 
I efore they are passed into a law ; and it is well known, that 
ministers do not always succeed in their measures. The canons 
of the Roman Catholic church refer to matters of faith as well as 
discipHne. In the Class-book of Maynooth, and in Butler no 
exception is made with respect to the dispensing power of the 
Pope not relating to canons containing articles of faith. 

One circumstance in addition to those which I have already 

idvanced, shall now be considered, in order to show that the 

hurch of Rome is not infallible. Where the spirit of truth is, 

iere shall we find the fruits of righteoSksness. Hermanns Von 

f»>er Hardt informs us, that others besides divines and grave 

secular men attended Constance during the council — to wit — 

barbers, three hundred and six, players, jesters, three hundred 

and forty-six, pastry-cooks, three hundred and twenty-five, and 

harlots, seven hundred ! ! ( Vid. Herm. Von Der Hardt de Rebua 

Univ^ersalis ConciJii Cor fttaritinensis, Tom. v, et Gerardi Dacheri 

t 



74 iiiE DIVINE RIGHT 

Constantinensis Histonam Magnatum in Constan. Cone. e\ 
MSS. Vindobonensi CEesareo.) The character of the coiinci 
of Trent is drawn by one of its members^ Duditheiis, bishop 
of live churches, who writhig to the emperor Maximiliian II 
gives this account : 

"We daily saw hungry and needy bishops come to Trent ; youths for the 
most part which did begin to have beards, (grave and sage divines!) given 
over to luxury and riot, hired only to give their voices as the pops 
PLEASED. They were unlearned and simple yet fit for their purpose in regara 
^f their impudent boldness. 

In one of the early sessions of the council, when there were 
present only forty-eight bishops ; they decreed the authority of 
the Vulgate, of tradition, and of the Apocrypha. — Father Paul, 
who was never excommunicated that I am aware of, says : 

•' Some thought it strange that five cardinals and forty-eight bishops shoulc 
have so easily defined the most important and principal points of religion, 
which till then, had never been decided ; giving canonical authority to booka 
considered uncertain and apocry^phal ; rendering authentic a translation, 
differing fi'om the original iexf, and instructing and prescribing the^inanneT 
of understanding the word of God. J^Tor was there amongst the prelates any 
one worthy of attention from his learning. There were some lawyers, learned, 
perhaps, in that profession, but unskilled in rehgion — a few theologians, but 
these of less than ordinary talent, the greater number gentlemen, or courtiers; 
and as to their dignities, some were only titular — the greater part, bishops of 
80 small a place, that considering each to represent his own people, it could 
not be said that one thousandth part of the Christian world were represented. 

Is it not an insult to common sense to suppose, that you could 
for a moment regard assemblies, composed of such characters 
caTjable of deciding infalhbly upon articles of faith, and oi 

• 'ightening the world upon the great truths of salvation 1 No 

• —never can I entertain such an extravagant, such a monstrous 
aosurdity. The light of the nineteenth century, believe me, wil^ 
pour its mighty rays upon the church of Rome, and expose it ir 
all its naked deformity to the world. 

My friend has told us, that wc may exercise our private judg 
ment upon the notes of the Bible, provided they refer not to matters 
of faith. It is not always easy to distinguish between matters 
of faith and other articles. But what shall we say as to morals ? 
At a full meeting of the Roman Catholic board, held in Decern 
ber> 1816, the notes of an edition of the Douay Bible, which 
had just appeared, were pronounced by a gentleman who has 
just left the chair, as containing damnable doctrines. The sam« 
mdividuai declared, that he would not continue within the paid 
of the church of Rome, if those notes were not publicly disavowed 
The Roman Catholic hierarchy have not hcwever protested 
agamst them. I would ask in this place, does not the opinion, 
that notes are indispensably necessary for the right understanding 
•f the sacred volume^ imply, that the word of man is raor© iotel 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 75 

Kgible tnan the word of the living God 1 Mr. Maguire observed 
that Protestants also have notes appended to their Bibles. 
Surely a Protestant does not act inconsistently with his principles 
when he consuhs a commentator. I may avail myself of the 
light which a fellow-raan throws upon a passage of scripture, 
without deeming him infallible. My friend has again asserted, 
that his translation is the genuine version. Is his version 
genuiup, when it contradicts the original? I submit to the 
leained world, to decide, whether the Douay version be more 
correct than the Prot^^tant Bible. I have already referred to 
the passage relative to Jacob worshipping his staff. Is " pen- 
ance'' a correct rendering of the word " w£7«rot«,'' which 
obviously signifies a change of mind? I shall be told, perhaps, 
that the Vulgate renders " fjeKxtoelp^^ " agere penitentiam." 
But who is so ignorant of Latin, as not to know, that "agere 
otiuni'' signifies " to be at leisure ;" "Agere vitam," " to live ?'• 
and so I would translate " Agere penitentiam," " to repent." 

It is worthy of remark, that Delahogue does not numbei 
among the eighteen general councils, the council of Jerusalem, 
as the Roman Catholic divines designate the assembly at Jeru- 
salem. Let my friend adduce the same proofs of the inspiration 
of councils, as those which the xipostles exhibited, and then shall 
we bow down to their authority. I am asked how the poor man 
is to decide whether the Bible be the word of God ? I w^ould 
premise, that the right to do a thing and the power to io it, are, 
very different. I may have a right to go to the East Indies, 
and yet be unable to undertake so long a voyage. Therefore 
I again repeat, that the right to do a thing, and the 

POWER TO DO IT, ARE VERY DIFFERENT. I am asked, hoW 

the poor man is to decide whether the Bible be the word of 
(xod ? As to the poor Protestant or Roman Catholic, when 1 
present them with a copy of the Scriptures, they will probably 
be found to be already in possession of some general notion of 
us inspiration. I shall take a still more extreme case : I shall 
consider the situation of a person in a distant country, who hag 
bijen ;;}reviously altogether ignorant of the existence of the word 
of life — illiterate, but capable of reading. I present him witb 
the sacred scriptures, and remark, that a perusal of their con- 
tents will convince him that the volume has proceeded from 
God* The man feels himself to be a sinner, and a depraved 
creature ; he witnesses daily proofs of human mortality, but 
unacquamted wilh the scenes which lie beyond the grave, 
peoples them with the visions of his own distempered imagi- 
nation. The inspired records meet the circumstances in which 
he is placed, by making known peace and pardon through 3 
Saviour's blood, and bv throwing a flood of light over b*a p^^ 



76 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

sent and even^sting destinies. Surely if we can disco\er the 
8xist?nce of God from the works of his hands, we may doubt- 
less expect, if the Bible have come from Him, that it contains 
such proofs of its divine origin, that the sinner shall be con- 
strained to acknowledge " God has spoken of a truth," and to 
say cf the Bible, as the woman of Samaria said of th*^. Redeemer, 
" Come, see a man that told me all that ever I did ; is not this the 
Christ?" The inspired volume penetrates the inmost recesses 
'jC the heart, lays open the secrets of the sou' discovers a man 
to himself, and carries its own witness that it has emanated from 
the Fountain of Light. I would also remark, that the written 
word is not the only means which God has provided for the 
instruction of man. He has also appointed the preaching of 
his Gospel. The individual who has received the knowledge 
of salvation through the medium of oral instruction, finds no 
difficulty in receiving the sacred oracles as an inspired volume. 
He approaches them with a spiritual appetite, and experiences 
the word of truth to be the life and comfort of his soul. " As 
well," will he exclaim, " as well might you endeavour to per- 
suade me, that there is no light nor warmth in the sun, as to tell 
me, that no spiritual consolation flows from the doctrines con- 
tained in this blessed volume." 

This is an extreme case — I have met it ; but permit me to 
say, that there are innumerable proofs of the authenticity, 
integrity, and canonicity of the inspired volume — -and I am 
veady, when called upon to ^*"te them. I now ask Mr. Ma- 
guire, by what mode he wouia prove to an individual in circum- 
stances similar to those which we have been considering, that 
^e Bible is a divine revelation ? Mark this question Mr. Ma- 
ffuire^ and let me have an answer. 

Is it, let me ask, the case, that infidels and atheists are chiefly 
found among the Protestant poor ? Need I reply in the negative? 
Who have been the authors of heresies? Dupin informs us — 

" If there be obscure and difficult parts in the Bible, it is not generally the 
simple who abuse them, but the proud and learned who make a bad use of 
them. For in fine it is not the ignorant and the simple who have forme^d 
heresies in perverting the word of God. — They who do so, are gentrdly bisko'ps, 
piiests, learned and enlightened persons. So that so far from knowing \>y 
experience, that the reading of the scriptures is dangerous to the simple and 
the ignorant, one may say, that we learn therefrom that it seldom causes any 
but the learned to fall into error, and that the simple have generally found there 
nothing but what is edifying and instructive,^^ —Dissort prelim, sur la Bibl«: 
6. i, C.9. Par. 1701. 

Cardinal Bellarmme writes as ioliowss : 

" Heresies originate with men of the upper rank rather than with persong 
belonging to the inferior classes. Beyond a doubt almost all authors ofheresiei 
have been either bislwps or presbyters (or as some would perhaps translate it, 
pnests,) Heresies are therefore to be considere i as the factions of leading 



CF PRIVATE lUDOMENT. 77 

©en, without whom there would be no popular revolts in the chun h,'' — 1>« 
Romano Pont 1. i, c. 8, ultima editio ab ipso Authore Recognita. Colonia 
fol. 1620, tom.i, p. 527. 

The people, I maintain, are the safest defositatiies of 
God's blessed Word. Ecclesiastics may be tempted to per- 
vert it ; the poor are not likely to sufler such a temptation. If 
therefore, the liability of the sacred scriptures to perversioi., 
furnish a just reason for withdrawing the inspired volume fror^' 
any portion of the community, it should be taken from ectles!-- 
astics who have abused it, and put into the hands of the poor 
and the unlettered. 

The church of Rome, where she is dominant, may succeed 
by the strong hand of ecclesiastical despotism in repressing the 
outward expression of opinion. Have you never heard of Jews 
abroad, in order to avoid persecution, entering the priesthood, 
and while celebrating mass, cursing the power which obliges 
them to act in opposition to their conscience ? The Rev. Joseph 
Bianco While, who was chaplain to the king of Spain, now a 
clergyman of the church of England, and who hved in the com- 
munion of the church of Rome, twenty-five years in sincere 
submission, and ten in secret rebellion against her authority, in 
his •' Evidence against Catholicism," 2d edit. p. 7, writes thus— 

*^ At the end of a year from the preaching of this sermon — the confession 
b painful, indeed, yet due to religion itself — / was bordering upon atheism. 
If m/ case were singular, if my knovvledse of the most enlightened classes 
of Spain did not furnish me with a multitude of sudden transitions from 
sincere faith and piety to the most outrageous infidelity : I would submit to 
the Kambling conviction, that either weakness of judgment, or fickleness of 
character had been the only source of my errors. But though I am not at 
liberty to mention individual cases, I do attest, from the most certain know- 
ledge, that the history of my own mind is, vnth little vai'iation, that of a greal 
portion of the Spanish Cinergy, The fact is certain; I make no individual 
chari^e ; every one who comes within this general description may still weai 
the mask, which no Spaniard can throw ot] without bidding an eternal fare- 
well tO his country." 

The church of Rome may look in some measure fair anc! 
uniied ; but within, the system is full of dead men's bones and 
all uncleanness. 

I now call upon Mr. Maguire to inform us, by what mode the 
poGi man can know according to his views, tb^t the Bible is the 
book of God. 

Mr. Maguire. — I wish Mr. Pope would afford mr^ ^ometliing 
tangible to comment upon. I fling back his Protestant and 
Huguenot authorities. I was not a little astonished to h^ar 
Mr. Pope quote that a{ ostate, Blanco W^hite, as an authority 
against the Catholic chup^h. I assert that the man who lived 

for ten years, according to his own testimony, an atheist a 

7* 



7b THE DIVINE RIGHT 

heart, is no worthy of credence, when testifying against tin 
Roman Catiiolic church. Mr. Pope has again quoted from 
Dr. Delahogue ; but when he proves that Dr. Delahogue has 
writtt.-n any thing contrary to CathoHc faith, he will certainly 
have achieved much. Mr. Pope nas endeavoured to make a 
point about the word /usravoLa, It is the Greek word for doing 
penance, and it i^ used in the passage quoted from the sacred 
volume, in reference to the men of Nineveh, of whom Christ 
says " the men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with thia 
generation, and shall condemn it ; because they did penance at 
the preaching of Jonas :" the Protestant translation has it 
** because they repented." Our Saviour in that passage alluded 
to the repentance of the men of Nineveh — what was that repent- 
ance ? They did penance in sackcloth and ashes ; they fasted 
for three days ; and they did not even suffer their cattle to eat 
any thing during that period . and we find it recorded in the 
sacred volume, that their repentance, or penance, disarmed the 
A^rafeh of God. FastiDi^ and praying are thrown overboard now- 
a-days, when we have the liberty of the gospel. Pampering the 
body is now the plan, and good works are scouted as being 
things of supererogation. It is only in the Catholic church we 
find fasting ynd praying practised. 

Mr. Pope says, that a number of harlots came to the council 
of Trent, aod be quotes Fra Paolo, an historian than whose 
authority he could not produce worse. I could relate disgrace- 
ful facts of another church, matters which rest not upon the ipse 
dixit of a partial historian, but which are well known to have 
occured. I shall not, however, insult this meeting, nor pullute 
my lips with the recital of such filthy impurities. It was, to say 
the least of it, a breach of good manners on the part of Mr. 
Pope towards the ladies who are present, to introduce the 
scandalous frabrication of that faithless historian. I will not 
disgrace my situation here and in the church, by descending to 
such arguments. I could, if I pleased, quote much to you 
about Henry the Eighth, and the Virgin Elizabeth. I could 
tell you matters of fact with regard to those patrons of the 
refoirnatior^ — and, indeed, I might, by the relation of a few facts, 
take ample revenae upon my antagonist. 

Mr. Pone talks of there having been hungry bishops at the 
council of Trent • — that is a charge that cannot be made against 
the Protestant bishops of the present day, who have got the 
tithes and the green acres. I v. ould warn the Protestant 
Dishoos and clergy, who are in possession of the good things., 
how they allow the principle which Mr. Pope advocates to 
spread throughout the land. If every man is to be allowed to 
think for himself on matters of faith, it will then come to hi 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 9 

RSfeed, why do we pay j£^800,C00 a year for the maintenance of 
an useless clergy ? " Let us fling away the tithes," it will be 
said — these men have, on their own showing, no right to dictate 
to us on matters ot^ religion — and as we do not want them, why 
should we be so enormously taxed for their support." Such 
will be the consequences, if the Protestant clergy, instead of 
o[>posing, actually countenance and support the principles 
ad\ ocated by Mr. Pope. What says a Protestant Clergymrr, 
the Rev. Mr. O'Callaghan, upon this subject 1 

" When Mr. Pope and Dr. Singer, men indeed of high character, and by 
fer the ablest advocates of the Bible Society, at least in Ireland — when men 
of this description, dangerous in proportion to their great intellectual and 
literary calibre, are led away by the prevailmg delusion, and not ashamed tc 
tell the world that ' the right of an ignorant labourer to read the Bible, involvea 
his right of interpreting it* — why is the church silent ■? Why does she not 
address them in her proper organ, if such still exist, to the following effect: — 
* Reverend brethren, your argument is fallacious, and it is our bounden duty 
to tell you so. Most true it is that a poor labourer has a right to read the 
Bible for the health of his soul, and to bathe in the sea for the health of his 
body. His right to bathe is as clear as his right to read — his right to go into 
the water also iinphes his right to swim ; but if he swim very imperfectly, or 
not at all, we hope you will allow that his efforts to swim would be danger- 
ous, nay, fatal, and that he should not proceed more than chin-deep. 

" You friends of Christianity beware of Bible Societies every where — lyou 
friends of peace and good-will among men beware of Bible Societies, and 
other proselytizing associations, especially in Ireland ? Remember their 
great principle that has nearly extinguished Christianity in what is called 
Protestant Germany — be wise in time, farewell! !" 

Mr. O'Callaghan, a gentleman of talents and extensive inform- 
iCJon says, that the right of private judgment is not recognised 
m the church of England. Here we have a Protestant ecclesi* 
astic arrayed against the doctrine which is preached up by Mr. 
Pope, who is a Protestant, but not an ecclesiastic. Mr. Pope 
has spoken of infidelity being a consequence of Popery. I 
hold in my hand a sermon preached by the Rev. Mr. Rose in the 
c dlege of Cambridge, and dedicated to the bishop of Chester ; ia 
this sermon he thus describes the state of Protestant Germany :— 

" From the state of Protestantism in Germany, a stronger, and perhapt 
more important lesson is offered on that subject, which is said to form the 
base and the boast of Protestantism — the right of private judgment. The 
territle evils resulting in the German church from its exercise, are the 
8ir. ngest practical proof of the wisdom and necessity of restraining it 
Among the German divines it is a favourite doctrine that it is impossible there 
to'ild ha.ve been a miracle, and the words of scripture are examined and 
fcioed into any meaning but their ov/n. By some the miracles are said to 
be, that mythology which must attend every religion to gain the attention of 
thi multitude; by some the common and well known ribaldry of the infidel 
IS unspa^mgiy used ; by one or more, high in station in the church, some 
Br ifice, and probably magnetism has been, even within the last ten years, 
suggested ; others go so far as to attack the whole booy of the prophets as 
Impostors, in most outrageous and revolting terms. This docrnne is taught 
Oy divinep from the pulpit — by professors from the chairs ol theology — it ii 



80 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

addressed to the old to free them from anc ent pnyiidices, and to the vonns 
as the knowledge which can make them truly wise. Ihis abdicatfoii ui 
Christianity is not confined either to the Lutheran or Calvinist profession, 
but extends its baneful and withering influence with baneful force over each. 
It is curious to observe in what way they get rid of all miracles. Professoi 
Paulus, in his Critical Commentary assures us, that the man with the with- 
ered hand had only a luxation of the shoulder, which Jesus perceiving puUe« 
it into joint." 

Professor Schultness explains this miracle as follows : 

" The man had a severe rheumatism ; Christ observing that his blood wtLl 
much moved, by the indignation with which he heard the question of tii« 
Pharisees, said to him in that favorable moment, "Stretch out thine hand;* 
the man attempted to do it, and was healed because that extraordinary 
excitement had removed the impediment under which belaboured. When 
Chript restored sight to the blind man, the poor fellow had such weakness in 
his eye-lids, that he could not keep his eyes open. Christ observing that he 
never made the attempt to open them, said to him, ' Thou shalt open thine 
eyes ;' the confidence of the man was so great, that makmg the attempt with 
ail his might, he opened his eyes. Christ never walked in the waves, but on 
the shore, or he swam behind the ship, or he walked through the shallows. 
The daughter of Jairus was not dead, because Christ himself said 'She 
sleepeth.' When Jesus said to Peter, 'Thou slialt catch a fish, and find in 
his mouth a piece of money,' the meaning is, before you can sell it for so 
much, you must open its mouth and take out the hook. At Cana in Galli- 
lee, Jesus gave a nuptial present of very fine wine, with which, for a joke, he 
filled the water-pots of stone. The paralytic was an idle fellow, who for 
thirty years had moved neither hand nor foot. Christ asked him ironically, 
'Perhaps thou wouldst be whole?' This irony stirred him up ; — he forgot his 
hypocrisy." 

But let us for a moment look at home ; see the numerous 
sects spread throughout the land — the Seekers, the Jum.pers, 
the Methodists, the Southcotonians, &c, &c ; all differing more 
from each other, than does the Catholic from the Protestant 
church. They afford a rare specimen of that chaos of reform, 
that Babel of interpretation, which is generated by the exercise 
of private judgment. 

A question has been put to me, as to the means by which 1 
would attempt to convert the pagan ; I will tell you in plain 
terms the course I would adopt. 1 would present him witi the 
Bible ; he would ask what book that was ? I would tell him 
that it was inspired by God, and left by him to man as a help 
towards the salvation of his soul, and to instruct him in doctrint 
and morality. He would then inquire by what means I knew 
that this was the book of God. I would, in reply, address him 
as a rational man ; I would tell him that the author of that book 
had descended from heaven — had tak *n upon him \ne figure of 
mortal man — that he declared himself the Messiah of God, and 
the Redeemer come to save the world, and that he proved his 
Hivine mission by the most astonishing miracles that ever yei 
were w :ought. He would then ask, how did I know those facta 
occurred, and that such miracles were performed I wf^ulc 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 81 

appeal to the positive evidence of coritemporar} writers, ^%lv^Ql 
for the moment I should not consider inspired. I would appeal 
to the scripture as an historical record. I would show that il 
po£:^essed historical truth — that the Jews never controverted its 
accuracy. I would, in fine, appeal to the common consent oi 
marikind, to the inhabitants of distant and different nations, 
subject to different passions, manners, and habits, speaking quite 
dilfcrent linguages, and having no communication, verbal of 
written. I would ask him, was he ready to believe, that all 
thos') individuals, historians, and nations, had conspired to attest 
a deliberate falsehood, to impose upon the whole world, and o{ 
course upon their children, and children's children, a book 
purporting to be the work of God, but in reality a book of lies, 
falsehood, and false miracles ? xis soon as I convinced him 
that Christ wrought the miracles, attributed to him in that book, 
(and how could he doubt these miracles, when they were admitted 
botn by Jews and Gentiles?) I would point out to him the 
many clear, manifest, and obvious texts in scripture, by which a 
church was proved to be founded and established by Christ, and 
endowed ivith authority to teach^ and the most solemn assurances 
thai it would never teach error. I would prove from clear and 
obv^^us texts ^f scripture, and more clear and obvious texts 
could not be quoted in support of any doctrine of the Christian 
religion, that the church of Christ could never teach error to 
manl'iind. He would then have only to examine these texts as 
to thj alleged authority of the church, and, this one truth admitted, 
all his doubts and difficulties upon these points would instantly 
disappear. The quibbles and objections raised by the deists 
agamst the sacred volume would vanish in a trice ; and con- 
scious of his own incapacity, and having no alternative but to 
submit to authority, or by renouncing authority to reject ah 
mysteries, he would follow the church, as a safe and certain guide 
But how would Mr. Pope convert the pagan. Mr. Pope woufd 
tell iiim that the Bible is the book of God. The pagan will 
naturally ask him, how does he know it to be such ? Mr. Pope, 
in reply, would appeal to a certain illumination of the spirit — a 
iath*>r uncertain standard, it must be allowed, for a poor ignorant 
uncGMverted pagan. It is an argument, to say the least of it 
id al surdum, 

Mr. Pope must then have recourse to authorities. This is aJ 
I want. If he receive the Bible as the work of God, upon 
authority, then he establishes the necessity of authority in the 
Christian world. If then, he says that he cannot otherwise 
prove me inspiration of the sacred scriptures : then I ask him, 
how can an act of supernatural faith be founded upon human 
fellible authority. The infidel, on the contra: y, when converted 



W THE DIVINE RIGHT 

hy a Catholic, receives in baptism a divine habitual grace 
wiiereby he is enabled to beheve in the auihority of the church, 
from the passages which I have already cited, and which prove 
me existence of a church, and its infalhbiHty. I defy Mr. Pop€ 
to produce passages half so clear in support of any single 
doctrine of Christianity. Did he produce any passage so cleat 
in support of his rule of faith? St. Paul tells us to avoid a 
heretic, as 'being condemned by his private judgment.'- Proprio 
judicio condemnatus, is the language of the Latin Vulgate ; and 
it is admitted by many learned Protestants, to be the best trans- 
lation of the scriptures extant. Even St. John tells us not to 
salute a heretic, " nee ave ei dixeritis." Will Mr. Pope convince 
any one of the inspiration of the scriptures, but on human 
authority alone. Now, " faith comes from hearing, and hearing 
from the words of Christ." Mr. Pope's faith is therefore 
grounded on human authority, and not on divine inspiration. 
The Socinian comes to Mr. Pope, (and here I would solicit 
your particular attention to this point,) and says, I agree with 
you in your principle of private judgment — I agree with you that 
the scriptures are the inspired word of God ; but you, Mr. Pope, 
have corrupted the sense of the scriptures. You put upon them 
an interpretation which they will not, cannot bear. You admit 
articles of faith which are opposed to the scriptures, and contrary 
to common sense. You hold in common with me that there is 
no way of judging or interpreting the sacred scriptures, except, 
according to private judgment, or, in other words, common 
sense. Again, you say, that a woman conceived an infant 
through a supernatural agency. Here also is a romantic inter- 
pretation, quite impervious to reason and to common sense, 
lou should, (concludes the Socinian,) you should understand 
>'[ those texts in a figurative sense. Mr. Pope will then recur 
to various passages of scripture to prove the divinity of Christ ; 
but when he urges his interpretation against that of the consistent 
Socinian, the latter will contend for his equal right to interpret 
(hem ; and he will justly inquire, is no man but Mr. Pope to be 
allowed to exercise the right of private judgment ? I have ae 
good a right to believe in the existence of an infallible church, 
and the Socinian as good a right to maintain his own interpreta- 
tion, and reject all mysteries, as Mr. Pope has to believe in his 
principles. When Mr. Pope endeavours to urge his interpreta- 
tion on the Socinian he abandons his own principles. Mr. Pope 
has no right to blame any man for having exercised his private 
judgment. Or is that a privilege to be exercised exclusively by 
the *' saints" and the *' elect?" Let Mr. Pope get out of the 
predicament if he can. If he can clear up that difficulty, he 
will uideed be a ' Magnus Apollo.' Let him quit quibHing 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 88 

about councils and come directly to the word of God — ^* No 
prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.** 
2 Peter, i, 20. I challenge Mr. Pope to show how a Protestan 
can make an act of faith. But the Catholic who believes iu 
the church established by Christ, founds his faith upon the 
authority of that church. All difficulties vanish before him,— 
the atheist or the deist may start several objections which he 
cannot answer, but *^ the church is the solution of all difficulties." 
Mr. Pope inquires how I can get out of the vicious circle, in 
which he says I am involved, by proving the existence of the 
church upon the authority of the scriptures, and proving the 
authority of the scriptures upon that of the church. 

Mark my answer. — I prove the authority of the church by 
passages of scripture, not denied by Mr. Pope, — by passages of 
scripture which are held in common by all Christians. I 
presume Mr. Pope believes in the four gospels : now I appeal 
to the four gospels, and to the first epistle of St. Paul to Timothy, 
to prove that Jesus Christ endowed his church with the glorious 
privilege of infallibility. Mr. Pope admits the four gospels, and 
St. Paul's epistle to be genuine. Having proved therefore the 
authority of the church from those books of scripture acknowledged 
by Mr. Pope ; I then prove upon the authority of that church 
already established, the inspiration of the other books which are 
not acknowledged by Mr. Pope. Where now, gentleman, is the 
vicious circle ? I have another method of breaking this magical 
ring — of opening this vicious circle — I will reveal it, in the hope 
that the ''^ circle"^ ^ will never be proposed as an argument against 
the Catholic church again. I take the book of the New Testa- 
r\Q\\i in my hand, and for a moment, not considering it to be 
flspired, I produce it as a genuine and faithful historical relatioti 
of the occurrences of the times in which Jesus Christ lived. I 
learn from this book that a man appeared then upon earth, who 
called himself the Son of God : I find it there recorded that he 
performed innumerable miracles in the open day, and in presence 
of his most inveterate enemies — that he raised a man called 
Lazarus to life, whose body was nearly rotten in the grave, and 
that he performed many other and extraordinary miracles, " If I 
had not (says our Lord,) done among them the works that no 
oth*:r man hath done, they would not have sin in them.'' — (John 
XV, 24.) I find from this historical relation that Christ established 
a church upon earth, to which he made ample and extraordinary 
promises — that he would remain with his church all days, even 
unto the consummation of the world — that he would send the 
Paraclete to guide it in the way — that he would build it UDon a 
rock — that it would be the pillar and the ground of truth, and 
that the gates of hell shall never pre rail against it. I taka 



84 THE MVINE RIGHT 

this as a mere history, and if we are to adrri istory, I find u 
there recorded, that Christ proved his missicn by numerous 
miracles. I thus prove the avAhoriiij of the church upon the 
authority of ChrkVs miracles attested by the strongest historical 
evidence — to wit, the historical evidence of the scriptures, and 
[ then prove that the scriptures are inspired upon the authority 
of the church. There is the solution of what Mr. Pope calls a 
vicious circle. But I feel confident, that Mr. Pope will tind av 
rather a hard matter to extricate himself from the circle in whictl 
I Lave him enclosed. 

Mr. Pope — Mr. Maguire has not spoken of the Rev. Joseph 
Blanco White in the most complimentary terms. I beg to 
assure Mr. Maguire, that those who are personally acquainted 
with Mr. White, describe him as a worthy and excellent man. 
I could name a gentleman who is not very far distant from this 
platform, a reformed priest, who has published the nature of the 
conversation which, he asserts from his own knowledge, is 
interchanged when priests meet together. I shall not pollute 
my lips by mentioning it. As to the repentance of the people 
of Nineveh, I would ask, is God satisfied with the ext( rnal 
expressions of sorrow 1 Does he not say, " rend your hearts 
and not your garments, and turn to the Lord your God P' 
With the character of Henry the Eighth I have little to do. 
Providence 'tis true, employed him as an instrument, for the 
accomplishment of important purposes. Henry, indeed, denied 
the Pope's supremacy ; but there is no reason to doubt that he 
died a Roman Catholic in principle. Mr. Maguire has eulogized 
IMr. O'Callaghan. Mr. O'Callaghan, I must be allowed to say, 
is not the organ of Protestant opiiiion. I grant that infidelity 
exists in Germany ; but I would ask, what is the difference 
between the state of so iety in that country and in Spain? 
Infidelity in the latter country is afraid to give utteiance to its 
opinions ; \i^ Germany it speaks out. Is it not more honorable 
to profess scepticism, than to cloak beneath the garb of hy- 
pocrisy an atheistical heart ? I shall reserve my observatior;^ 
:^n the divisions which Mr. Maguire remarks, exist among Pro- 
testants, till we come to the subject of unity. In proof that the 
Bible is the word of God, my friend closes it, and appeals to 
ext3rnal evidence — to the universal consent of mankind ; and 
requires the individual to believe on his iesiimonij^ that the univer- 
sal consent of mankind is in support of the inspired records. 
In order to discover the universal consent of mankind, is the 
pagan, I would ask, to read all the histories that exist 1 Does 
Dot Mr. Maguire,, in truth, appeal to the private judgment )f th*- 
man? Does he not adopt that node of reasoning which L« 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 8J 

professes to condemn? Is it not apparent that Mr. Maguire 
will have a much more troublesome task than I shall have ? I 
have not to prove the infallibility of any church. I let the Bible 
speak for itself. Mr. Maguire ridicules the idea of an internal 
illumination, and asks, how can a man know whether he pos- 
sesses that inward light? I answer, 

" The fruits ofthe Spirit are charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodnesa, 
love, amity, mildness, faith, modesty, continency, chastity." — Gal. v, 22, 23. 

Where the fruits of the Spirit are, there the Holy Spirit dwells 

" If any man will do the will of G od, he shall know whether the doctrine 
be of God or not," says the Saviour. — John, vii, 17. 

My friend asks, how can a man make an act of faith upon 
human authority ! I answer, I do not make an act of faith on 
human authority, while I maintain that Mr. Maguire does so. 
Mr. Maguire observes, that he would first regard the scriptures 
merely as an historical record and that as such they will con- 
vince his judgment that his church is infallible. I must be 
allowed to assert, that in thus appealing to the gospels as merely 
historical authority^ and building upon them, as such, the infalli- 
bility of the church of Rome, Mr. Maguire acknowledges that 
her claim to infallibihty rests only upon human authority. Su 
that Mr. Maguire makes an act of faith in the infallibility of hi» 
church according to his own views, merely upon hu?nan authority, 
I am sure that the Roman Catholic Hierarchy will be much 
indebted to Mr. Maguire for this disclosure. 

As to grace being necessarily conferred at baptism, it is mere 
assertion. In proof of the opposite opinion, we have only to 
refer to the conduct of children. Do we discover every child 
who has been baptized, evincing the influence of divine grace in 
his temper and conduct? By no means. The existence of the 
immoral practices of which children are guilty, is a direct refu- 
tation of Mr. Maguire's position, that every child receives grace 
at baptism. 

Mr. Maguire says, that no doctrine is so clearly proved in 
scripture as the infallibility of the church of Rome. Million! 
are of a contrary opinion. Had God really revealed the infalli- 
bility of the church of Rome, we can scarcely imagine but thalt 
he would have made it known in such broad and legible char- 
acters, that he that runs might read it. I should like to know, 
where the Pope is mentioned in the Bible? 'Tis not an act of 
saving faith, to believe merely that a book has proceeded from 
God. I exercise saving faith, when I exercise it upon the truths 
of salvation contained in the scriptures. 

I make an act of faith, not on the testimony of man, but on 
the authority of God. I behave the blessed truth, "the blood 

8 



86 THE VIVINE RIGHT 

of Jesus Christ clcanseth from all sin,' because I see such m 
intrhisic glory in the scheme ot redemption, as convinces me 
that God is its author. With respect to the pagan, I have 
shown you, that he can receive the Bible as inspired, without 
<he aid of external evidence- — the sacred volume itself bearing 
tvhness of its own divinity, and having the impress of heaven 
itainpod upon it. 

As to the q lestion of the Socinian, it has been canvassed ii» 
our letters, which are already before the public. When, 1 
believe, that my view of a particular subject is correct* and that 
of a fellow-man erroneous, I surely do not interfere with his 
private judgment, in endeavouring by argument to effect a 
change in his views. I appeal to his judgment, in order to 
convince him of his error. I would not, I could not force his 
judgment ; but I would endeavour by argument to carry con- 
viction to his mind. An individual, surely, may be convinced 
of the soundness of his opinion without laying claim to infalli- 
bility. J believe, indeed, that the man who holds not the divinity 
bf Christ is in fatal error. I believe, that, if he continue under 
its influence, he will perish ; and I would use my exertions to 
reclaim him. Reason, we must remember, has its legitimate 
province. A doctrine may be above our reason, and not opposed 
to it. God has not revealed the modus of his existence ; thai 
we are not called upon to believe. He has simply revealrd the 
Irutb, that a trinity of persons exists in the one Godhead ; that 
truth we are called upon to believe. Let us bear in mind the 
infinite distance between the great Supreme and the narrow 
capacity of man. Shall we, poor worms of the earth, who know 
out little of ourselves, who are but of yesterday, shall we bring 
Vj the bar of our finite intellects the nature of the infinite and 
Tternal God? Study the revelation which Peity has given of 
nimself, and you will perceive that the Father, Son, and Spirit 
respectively sustain, in the great scheme of redemption, offices 
x> which none but a divine person could be adequate. 

How does Mr. Maguire endeavor to convince the Socinian 1 
By the authority of his church. *' I deny in toto," replies the 
Socinian "her infallibility; how can I argue with you, wio 
refuse an appeal to common sense, to scripture, and to fact , 
for all these overthrow the supposed infallibility of your church?' 
On the other hand, I entertain some hope, that arguing on the 
principles of private judgment, I shall be enabled, under the 
divine blessing, to convince the man who will not listen to Mr. 
Maguire. I argue upon authority — the sacred scTiptures — 
which the Socinian Mmiis ; Mr. Maguire argues with him on 
giound which he will not acknowledge — ♦**« iofallibilitj cf thf 
uhurch of Rome. 



TF PRIVATE JUDGMENT 87 

Mf. Maguire has asked, now couid an ig? jrant Prote&tanJ 
icrlbrm an act of faith? Blessed be God; many poor can do 
so. God hath chosen not a few individuals who are " poor w 
this world, to be rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom.-' Mi, 
Maguire has referred to a passage in Peter. It runs thus, 
»* No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation/' 
Douay, 2 Pet. i, 20, (tJm^ sTuXvasatg,) or, as it mav be trans* 
lated, " no prophecy of scripture is its own intrepreter ;" we 
are to intrepret prophecy by the analogy of scripture. Can we 
imagine that St. Peter did not wish those whom he addressed, 
to give attention to the scripture, when in the 19th verse he 
says, " We have the more firm prophetical wor(^, whereunto 
you do well to attend^ as to a light that shineth in a dark place?' 
Whom does the Aposile exhort ? His epistle is not addressed 
to ecclesiastics exclusively, but " to them that have obtained 
equal faith with us in the justice of our God and Saviour Jesus 
Christ." And it is worthy of notice, that in the second epistle, 
in which the words that we are considering stand, there is no 
mention whatsoever made of any ecclesiastical officer. 
In the Apocalypse I find the following passage, — 
" Blessed is he that readeth and heareth the words of this prophecy,^^ 

Mr. Maguire has referred to the Apocrypha. It is remarkabii* 
that Mr. Maguire and his church should, on the canonicity of 
the Apocrypha, be at issue with those whose authority he pro- 
fesses to venerate. In the fourth century, we have the cata 
logues of Jerome, secretary to pope Damasus (in Praefat ad Libr. 
Hegum sive Prologo Galeato,) and of Rufinu?, (Expositio ad 
Symb. Apost.) most accurately agreeing with the Protestant 
eanon,^ and rejecting the Apocrypha. 

Rufinus writes as follows ! 

"Tills, then, is the Holy Spirit, who in the Old Testament inspired t!» 
.aw and the prophets, and in the New the gospels and the Apostles. Whcrt>' 
fore the Apostle says, that *all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and 
is profitable for doctrine.' — 2 Tim. iii, 16. It will not, therefore, be impropei 
to enumerate here the books of the New and Old Testament, w hich we find 
by the monuments of the Fat lers to have been delivered to the churches as 
inspired by the Holy Spirit. A.nd of the Old Testament, in the arst place, 
are the five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deutero- 
nomy. After these are Joshua, the son of Nun, and the Judges, together 
$vith Ruth. Next the four books of the kingdoms, which the Hebrews reckon 
iwo, the book of the Remains, which is called the Chronicles, and two books 
of Ezra, which by them are reckoned one, and Esther. The prophets arc 
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel, and besides one book of the tweJ'\, 
prophets. Job also, and the Psalms of David. Solomon has left three b^'oka 
to the churches, the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs ; with 
these they conclude the number of the books of the Old Testament. Of the 
New there are the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; thu 
Accts of the Apostles, by Luke ; fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul ; two 
wistles of the Apostle Peter; one of James, the brother of tha Lord and 



TO THE DIVINE HIGHT 

Apoiille ; one of Jude ; three of John ;" the Revelation of John. These are 
the volunnes which the Fathers have included in the canon, and oiJt of which 
ihey would have us prove the doctrines of our faith. 

" However, it ou^ht to he observed, that there are also other books which 
are not canonical, but have been called by our forefathers ecclesiastical, aa 
the VV'isdorr/ of Solomon; and another, which is called the Wiadom of the 
son of Sirach, and among the Latins is called by the general name jf Eccle- 
siasticus : by which title i? denoted, not the author of the book, but the quality 
of the writing. In the same rank is the book of Tobit and Judith, and tl*^ 
bookn of th^ Maccabees." — In Symb. Apost. ap. Cyprian in App. p. 26, 27 
et ap. Hier m. t. v. p. 141, 142. 

St. Jerome, secretary to Pope Damasus, writes thus — 

'^Tlie Hebrews have two and tw^enty letters ; and they have as manf 
books of divme doctrine for the instruction of mankind. The first book is 
called by them Bereshith, by us Genesis ; the second is called Exodua the 
third Leviticus ; the fourth Numbers ; the fifth Deuteronomy. Ti*****^ are 
the five books of Aloses, which they call Thora, the Law% 

"The second class contains the prophets, which they begin with tno oook 
of Joshua, the son of Nun. The next is the book of Judges, with which they 
join Ruth; her history happening in the time of the Judges. The thiid is 
Sanmel, which we call the first and second book of the kingdoms. The 
fourth is the book of Kings, or, the third and fourth book of the kingd'^ms^or 
rather of the Kings ; for they do not contain the history of many nation:?, bui 
of the people of Israel, only consisting of twelve tribes. The fifth is las *h; 
the sixth Jeremiah ; the seventh Ezekiel ; the eighth the book of the lv.\AYe 
Prophets. 

"The third class is that of hagiographa, or sacred writings : the first of 
which is Job ; the second David, of which they make one volume, called the 
Psalms, divided into five parts ; the third is Solomon, of which there are three 
books; the Proverbs, or Parables, as they call them, the Ecclesiastes, and 
the Song of Songs ; the sixth is Daniel ; the seventh is the Chronicles, con- 
sisting w4th us of two books, called the first and second of the Remains ; the 
eighth is Ezra, which among the Greeks and Ijatins makes two books ; the 
ninth is Esther. 

" Thus there are in all two and twenty books of the old Law ; that is five 
books of Moses, eight of the Prophets, and nine of the Hagiographa. But 
some reckon Ruth and the Lamentations among the Hagiographa, so the-e 
will be four and twenty. 

" The prologue I write as a preface to all the books to be translated by rae 
n-om the Hebrew^ into Latin, that we may hioio that all the books which an 
not of this number, are to be reckoned apocryphal: therefore, "V\ isdom, which 
is commonly called Solomon's, and the book cf Jesus, the son of Sirach, and 
Judith, and Tobit, and the Shepherd are not in the canon. The first book 
of Maccabees, I have fcmd in Hebrew ; the second is Greek, as is evident 
from the style." — In Prol. Gal. seu. Praefat. de Omnib. Libr. V. T. Tom. i, p. 
317—322. ed. Bened. "As therefore, the church readeth Judith and Tobit, 
and the books of the Maccabees, but does not receive them among the canon- 
ical scriptures ; so likewise it may read these two books (the book of Jesus, 
the son of Sirach, and the Wisdom of Solomon) for the edificati )n of the 
people, but not as of authority for proving a^.y doctrine of rehgion " — Prnef 
m libr. Salom. t. i, p. 938. 939. 

I state upon the authority of Josephus and Bellarmine thai 
the Jews never received the Apocrypha. — (Joseph. Cont. Apion, 
I. i, c. 8. ap. Euseb. Eccl. 1. iii, c. 9, 10. — Bellarm. Lib. i, De 
Vcrbo Dei, c. 10.) It is also worthy of notice, that thero are 
Cinatradictions in the Apocrypha to the canonical books. I an 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 89 

inclined to suspect, that one reason which induces the church 
of Rome to admit the Apocrypha, is, that they contain a passage 
or two which savor of purgatory. In Maccahees (1. vi, 16 — 2. 
i, 16. ix, 28.) we are informed that king Antiochus died three 
times over ! ! In 2 Mace, xiv, 42, suicide is commended. Thf. 
author of the second book of Maccabees concludes in the fol- 
lowing manner : 

*' I also will here make an end of my narration ; which if I have done \%eil, 
md as it becometh the history, it is what I desired ; but if not so perfectly, 
't must be pardoned me." — xv. 39. 

Does such language intimate that the author believed that he 
had written an inspired book? External and internal evidence 
will prove that the Apocrypha is not canonical. It is a well 
known fact, that in the time of Jerome, the Roman church did 
not receive the epistle to the Hebrews as canonical, while all the 
chuiches in the East received it. — She receives it now. Wha 
shall we think of her consistency? St. Jerome observes, that 

"Although formerly all the churches in the east did receive the epistles U 
the Hebrews as canonical, yet it was not received as canonical in the Latin 
(or Roman) church." — In Js. c. 6. Et Ep. 29. ad. Evag. Tom. iii. 

Jerome did not submit to the judgment of the church of Rome 
He says, 

"Although the Latin (or Roman) church doth not admit this epistle ai 
canonical, we notwitnstanding do receive it." — Ibid. 

My friend has referred to the passage of St. Augustin — 

" I would not believe the gospel except the authority of the Catholic church 
moved me thereto." 

We are informed that St. Augustin, at the head of a number 
of African bishops, wrote letters to the Pope of Rome resisting 
the claim of appeals made by three Popes. — (Cone. Afiic. apud. 
Surium. p. 59.) We may rest assured, therefore, that in the 
passEige which Mr. Maguire has cited, Augustin did not refer to 
the authority of the church of Rome, an authority which he him- 
self opposed. Permit me to make a fevy observations on the 
passage tc which Mr. Maguire has called our attention. It is 
probable that Augustin speaks hypothetically, not in »*efeienc€ 
to his then state of mind, but as if he was yet halting between 
Manichean principles, and those of the gospel, using crederem 
tro credidissemy commoveret pro commovisset, a change of tense 
riot unusual with some of tke fathers. I beg to give you the 
views of some eminent Roman Catholic writers upon this pas- 
sage : some refer the saying of Augustin, not to the present 
church but to the church in the lime of the Apostles. Thus 
Durandus de St. Sour^am after having quoted the words oi 
Augustin, observes, 

" Tliis passage which treats oTthe approval of the sa iptures hy the cAurc4> 

8* 



90 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

applies soleiy to the church in the times of the Apostles, which was filled 
with the Holy Spirit, and besides saw the miracles of Christ, and heard his 
doctrine, and on that account was a fit witness of the things which Chrisf 
both did and said."— Durand in 3 Sent. Dist. 24, a. i, fol, 169, 

Again, Gerson, commenting on this passage of Augustin, 
observes . 

"By the cnurcfj, Augustin means the primitive assemblies of those who 
kad seen and heaid Christ, and had been his witness." — De vita Spirit, 
inirr.ar. Lect. 2, corol. 7, part 3, fol. 322. 

The view of the celebrated cardinal De Aliaco is as follows : 

(In lib. Sentent. art, iii, fol. 49, 59.) After having observed that "the 
principles of theology are the truths of the sacred canon, because from them 
IS made the ultimate solution of theological discourse," 

He remarks, in reference to this very saying of St. Augustin. 

" It is not proved by the authority of St. Augustin^ that he believed in the 
gospel by the authonty of the church as a principle of theology^ by which it coula 
bt: proved theologically, that the gospel is time, but only as the first moving cause 
v;hich led him to the faith of the gospel. As if he or any other had said, I 
would not trust in the gospel, if the sanctity of the church, and the miracles 
of Christ had not moved me, in which saying, although there be assigned 
some reason for a belief in the gospel, it is not entirely a first principle." 

These quotations will serve, I trust, to throw some light upon 
the passage. I would beg to remind my friend, that if it were 
not capable of an easy and natural explanation, the Bible, and 
the Bible alone is the religion of Protestants. The testimony 
of St. Augustin is of no weight beyond the boundaries of truth. 
I have shown, however, that the meaning of Augustin's words 
\s different from that which Mr. Maguire ascribes to them ; and 
the comment of Augustin himself on the fourth chapter of John 
(Tract xvi, 23,) seems beautifully to elucidate his meaning : — 

" The woman first told the Samaritans, and they believed upon her testi- 
mony, and asked the Saviour to remain with them. He remained two days, 
and more believed. And when they had believed, they said to the woman, 
" We now believe, not for thy saying, for we ourselves have heard him, and 
know that this is -indeed the Saviour of the world," first, by report, after- 
wards by the presence of Christ" — " Primum per famam, postea per prae- 
eentiam." 

Augustin adds : 

" So now it happeneth with those who are out of the church and not yet 
Christians. Christ is taught by Christian friends, as it were by the woman, 
that is by the church's instruction. They come to Christ and believe by the 
report ; and many more and with more confidence beheve, that he is the 
Saviour of the world." 

The mere testimony of man may be the first exciting cause 
of drawing the mind tow^ards the scriptures ; but does that testi- 
mony therefore become infallible ? Does a man, ivho receivei 
the record that God has given concerning his Son^ though his 
fttlention may have been first attracted to the inspired records by 
^J^e tostimony of a fellow-crenture, exercise an act of faith on 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 91 

human authority ? By no means. Were all the churches and 
all the inhabitants of the world to assert, that a particular volunio 
was a revelation from God, if that volume contained an immoral 
co-le, palpable contradictions, or statements, plainly derogatory 
to the character of God, I could not receive it as divine. 

Mr. Maguire — My friend commenced by asserting that 
Christ did not pronounce his Apostles infallible, because Judaa 
betrayed his master. This fact only proves that he did not pro- 
n.ise diem the quality of impeccability, but by no means proves 
tiiat he did not promise them infallibility in matters of faith. 
I'hough Judas betrayed his master, he did not deny the faith- 
he committed the sin for money, and he supposed that his master 
svould escape from his enemies. Though he betrayed his mas- 
ter^ he was guilty of no breach of faith. I called on Mr. Pope 
(o show how a Protestant, literate or illiterate, can make an act of 
faith or of belief in the divine inspiration of the sacred scriptures. 
Mr. Pope says that the language of the scriptures carries about 
it internal evidence sufficient to convince. Are those, to whom 
he gives the scriptures, learned enough to discover this fact? 
He talked of an internal illumination, and how a person upon a 
sudden comes upon the light of the gospel. Is there a scholar 
present who does not feel that Mr. Pope has not approached 
\he difficulty 1 How will the poor and the illiterate ascertain 
*:he truth of scripture from the manner in which they are con- 
veyed ? May not the poor and ignorant man continue, as St. 
Augustin did before his conversion, to laugh at the sacred 
volume] But after his conversion, St. Augustin tells of the 
veneration he paid to that noblest of all works, the sacred 
scriptures. St. Augustin, be it remembered, was converted by 
the preaching and teaching of St. Ambrose, and not by reading 
\he Bible. How will the new convert from Paganism receive 
\he grace of the Holy Ghost? The grace of the Holy Ghosl 
\s not communicated until after baptism has been conferred. 
Look at Cornelius the cepturion. If in his moral habits and 
^ood life he exhibited a portion of God's mercy, he did nol 
receive the visible marks of the Holy Ghost until after his bap- 
tism. Nor did the Samaritans exhibit the marks of that divine 
grace, till they were baptized. It would be more difficult to 
bring home to the conviction of a pagan the proofs of thai 
internal evidence of the scriptures of which Mr. Pope speaks, 
than the proofs of their inspiration. Mr. Pope wants to prove 
the inspiration of the scriptures to the pagan, by a thing v/hich 
IS in itself more difficult of proof. With regard to the Socinian, 
how does Mr. Pope act? "I lay down," says he, "certain 
lexts of scripture — they are wrongly interpreted by the Sociniaa j 



98 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

but I did not force his judgment." Mr. Pope, thank God 
cannot force the judgment of any individual ; but my observa 
tions was, that Mr. Pope could not urge any interproiation a 
all upon the Socinian, without violating the principle of private 
judgment. The Socinian may retoj-t on iV"r. Pope, and tell 
nim that his interpretation of thj scriptures is false. The Soci- 
nian may say, '' I exercise my reason, and you surely will not 
find fault with me for doing so. The position that three make 
one, and one makes three, is perfectly above human comprehen 
sioii. Do you require me to admit things which are quite 
inconceivable ? You do not, of course, desire that I shoulc 
abandon my reason, and as to internal evidence ? — it is a thing 
neither known to you, nor to any one else." Such would be 
the answer of the Socinian to Mr. Pope. I, on the other hand* 
might not be able to convert the Socinian, but he could not say 
that I contradicted myself. I would deny to the Socinian the 
right to interpret the scriptures by private judgment. That 
would be leaving the word of God dependent on the whim and 
caprice of every individual. The word of God, I maintain, 
depends for its interpretation on the church — that church which 
is the collection of the churches of the same communion, scat- 
tered through the world — that church over which Christ appointed 
St. Peter to preside, giving to him the keys of the kingdom of 
heaven, promising that whatever he loosed on earth, should be 
loosed in heaven, and whatever he bound on earth, should be 
bound in heaven. Have all those churches conspired through- 
out ail ages to give a wrong interpretation to the scriptures ? 
or have they conspired to give a false meaning to any particular 
text 1 See the unanimous consent of different and distant 
nations on the subject. Is not that unanimous agreem.ent, a 
better proof of the truth of the interpretation, and of its having 
descended from the Jlpostles, than the varying and capricious 
judgment of each individual? Mr. Pope does not. say that ho 
is infallible, yet he endeavours with all the presumption of infal 
libility to force his interpretation of the scriptures on the Soci 
nian. Compare Mr. Pope's interpretation with the agreement 
of all nations — with that guod vniversa tenet ecclesia. Here are 
many churches and different nations all agreeing in a particular 
interpretation and specified articles of faith, for eighteen hundred 
years. Are not their opinions more worthy of adoption, than 
the whims and follies of individuals ? My friend has quoted 
some of the holy Fathers — I would advise him to act as Luther 
did, and throw them overboard. The Fathers, he will find, are 
quite against him. I could quote thirty diflferent Fathers, who 
strongly condemn the exercise of private judgment. St. An- 
gustin, in his book Contra Fausturi 11, tome vi, p. 183, savs 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 93 

"These, so many and so great ties bind the believing man to the Catholic 
church. The consent of nations ; the regular succession of bishops from 
Peter, to whom Christ committed the care of his sheep, down to the present 
bishop of Rome ; lastly, the name of CathoUc itself But unless the aiithoritv 
of this church induced me to it, I would not believe the Gospel. As thenl 
obey those who say to me, * Believe the Gospel ;' so why should I not obey 
them when they say to me, 'Beheve not the Manichaeans.' " 

" This church, moreover, the divine authority commends, and as it canrwt 
deceive us, he who fears to be imposed on will consult the church, which 
without any ambiguity, the scriptures establish." — Contra Cresconium Lib. 
, tom. 7, p. 168. 

And again — "Do thou run to the tabernacle of God, hold fast to the 
O'ltholic church ; do not depart from that rule of truth, and thou shait be 
protected in the tabernacle fi-om the contradiction of tongues." — Ennarratio 
tertia in psalmum 30, tom. viii, p. 74. 

I quote from genuine editions of the Fathers. I do not 
advance corrupted passages. Let Mr. Pope show me in a 
genuine edition any passage in which St. Augustin refused to 
hold communion with the church of Rome. Mr. Pope, in urging 
his interpretation of the scriptures upon the Socinian, would 
never succeed. The Socinian would say, '' T have as good a 
right as you, Mr. Pope, to the exercise of my private judgment, 
and reason is on my side.'' I might not be more feUcitious in 
my attempts to convert the Socinian. I would not, however, 
contradict my own principles. I would refer him to the consent 
of mankind through many ages. I would shame him, if he were 
a reasonable man, into conviction. I would take the Socinian 
by the throat — Mr. Pope could not even take him by the heels. 
Has Mr. Pope explained how it happens that Protestants must 
remain in many instances actual infidels, for several years after 
they have arrived at the age of discretion. The Protestant child 
cannot receive the Bible on the authority of Mr. Pope. When 
•^e opens the sacred volume, he finds passages in it which may 
►nake him believe it not to be the work of God. There are 
more passages to be found in it of that description, than Mr 
Pope could point out in what he considers the Apocrypha. But 
I hold the book in which they are found to be of divine inspira- 
tion ; and if I cannot understand them, I resign my judgment to 
the church. But the Protestant child must remain an infidel. 
For to doubt of Christir qity, is absolute infidelity. The Roman 
Catholic cnild, when baptized, receives the aid of the Holy 
Ghost. He promises at baptism to obey the church ; and I 
proved the object of his obedience entitled to it. But the illu- 
mmation of which Mr. Pope speaks, never can be proved. It ia 
adapted only to sublimated imaginations. It is unfortunate that 
Mr. Pope appeals to the Bible to decide our controversy — for 
he Bible is a dumb judge. Our Lord says to his apostles — 

" Go ye therefare, and teach all nations ; baptizing them in the name of 
the Father, and -jf the Sjn, and of the Holy Ghost Teaching Hieni U 



94 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

observe arl things whatsoever I have commanded yon ; and behold I am wit-i 
you all dajs, even to the consummation of the world." — Matt, xxviii, 19, 29 

Again — '*Go ye into the whole world and preach the Gospel t> everj 
creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved ; but he that 
beheveth not, shall be condemned." — Mark xvi, 15, 16. 

Here our Lord plainly tells us, that he who receives th<^ii 
preaching, when baptized shall be saved. Yvliere is the objeci 
of |Ir. Pope's faith] He cannot make the mere book the 
object of his faith. He cannot invest the translators with 
infallibility. He will not surely give that title to Beza, and 
others. Every thing in the Protestant church, and in Mr. Pope's 
la/ church, is fallible. How can an immoveable structure bo 
raised upon a moveable foundation? Mr. Pope illustrated one 
of his arguments, by placing one book on the top of another 
The illustration may be appropriately and happily applied in thi^ 
instance. Here are two books, which we shall suppose to 
represent the scriptures and private judgment. The Protestant 
child must read the scriptures upon the authority of private 
judgment, and vice versa^ he must sustain private judgment upor* 
the scriptures. He must capsize one to support the other. \i 
the Protestant church be liable to error, how can any man confide 
his faith in it? And even if the church be supposed fallible, 
would it not be cruel to deprive the poor and ignorant of their 
only guide, they themselves being anable to investigate. Buil 
Ihe Catholic church being infallibbj, the Catholic rests his faith 
with security on its authority. The consent of mankind for 
many ages is in support of the Catholic church. A single 
witness may be suborned, but millions cannot be bribed. I 
propose the following syllogistic argument to Mr. Pope, in 
reference to his faith. That faith cannot be divine which is 
founded upon human authority — now his faith is founded upon 
human authority, therefore it cannot be divme. There is a 
wonderful coincidence between the opinion of Luther, and the 
opinion of Mr. Pope, respecting the Apostles. They want to 
do away with the infallibility of the Apost'es, and they confound 
jnpeccability with infallibihty. Luther, in a German work, 
which I hold in my hand, and in another translated into Latin 
by Jonas Justus, at Luther's own request, speaking of the 
Apostles and Fathers, says — " The Apostles were great sinnerS; 
ignorant men, and precious rogues," or in the original. " Die 
Apostel seynd auck grosse Siinder geweszt, unde gute, grobe, 
grosse schaelck." He says, "Even Paul himself was not so 
sure of his doctrine, and often doubted, whether he preached the 
truth or not." '^ St. Jerome was a heretic" — " St. Chiysosloni 
was a prattler," and ridiculing the intercession of saints, 1 f 
dares to blaspheme his God : " I beseech you, oh 1 my deai 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 95 

little devil, that you intercede with God for me ; my dear little 
devil, pray to God for me." 

I now call on Mr. Pope to make the Bible speak, and thus 
decide the difference between us. If he does not do so, accord- 
ing to his principles, Christ has appointed a dumb judge to 
decide upon all differences between man and man. But our 
Saviour knew human nature too well to leave every individual to 
follow his own whim and caprice. If man be thus sent adiift 
without any certain guide to direct him in the way of salvation, 
it would be rather hard that he should be called to an account 
on the last day. I ask if Mr. Pope had an estate at stake, 
would he not employ a lawyer to direct him in his difficulties, 
would he not, instead of exercising his own private judgment on 
the Act of Parliament, leave it to the interpretation and decision 
of his legal adviser? He wisely relinquishes his private judg- 
ment and he saves his estate ; what does St. Paul mean when 
he speaks of " captivating every understanding?' — 2 Cor. x, 5. 
Innumerable are the evils which result from depriving the lower 
orders of that authority upon which alone their faith can be 
founded? Mr. Pope says that the declarations of Christ are 
obvious and plain. I wish to know by what means the Pro 
testant can ascertain that they are the declarations of Christ, Le* 
Mr. Pope quit the foolish doctrine of internal illumination 
tirius appealed to internal illumination — so did all the heretics — 
»o did, in latter times, the celebrated Johanna Southcote ; she 
announced herself as pregnant of the Messiah, and a whole 
swarm of English parsons were among her followers and be- 
lievers ! This doctrine, which Mr. Pope advocates, tends t(? 
the utter destruction of civil society and ecclesiastical regime, 
I would rather endure the despotism of a Ferdinand, than admii 
a principle so contradictory to common sense — a principle sc 
well calculated to rend asunder the ties which unite man to man, 
and to disolve the social system altogether 

Mr. Pope. — -My opponent, I must be allowed to observe, has 
substituted assertion for argument. He has said, that it is more 
difficult to prove the internal evidence of the scriptures, thav 
their inspiration. I brought forward the internal evidence iv 
proof of their inspiration. Mr. Maguire has asserted that a mar? 
must be baptized before he can receive the Holy Ghost. In 
the 8th chapter of the iVcts of the Apostles, we read that Philip 
before he acceded to the wish of the Ethiopian eunuch, who 
requested to be baptized, said, ^ If thou believest with all thy 
heart; thou mayest ;" the eunuch answered, " I believe that 
Jes'Uf Christ is the Soc of God.'' A man cannot exercise an 
act o^ faith, before he receives the Holy Ghost ; for *' no mnt 



96 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

can say tha( Jesus is the Christ, but by the Hi ly Ghost.** 
eunuch, therefore, must have beeu under the influence of 
Holy Spirit, when he niade this art of faith. After he had znadt 
\U " they went down to i^Vie^ water, both Phihp and the eunuch, 
and he baptized him." He isays, that it is contraiy to my system 
to urge any meaning of scripture against the conviction of the 
Socinian, / " it would interfere with the exercise of his private' 
judgment. '^ave already noticed his sophism, but the obser- 
/ati')n maj' ,y be returned upon Mr. Maguire. Does not the 
church of Rome act in contradiction to her principles, when 
arguing with the Socinian ? JVfust she not allow him to exercise 
his judgment upon the proofs which she brings forward in support 
of her claim to infallibility? My friend observes, that no man 
can force the judgment of another. I am convinced of the truth 
of the remark. But the church of Rome endeavours to force 
the judgment, and calls on men to act inconsistent with their 
reason] He says that I am opposed to the whole world. I 
stand here as an advocate of the great principles which genuine 
Protestants maintain in common, and as a protester against the 
errors to v>^hich they are in common opposed. Athanasius 
declared himself to be alone against the whole world, when 
Pope Liberius signed the Arian creed, and the condemnation 
of Athanasius. — (Dupin, Eccl. Hist. 2 vol. p. 62, 1697, Lond. 
—Baron, tom. 1, 939, ad ann. 357, No. 46, Mayence 1611.) 
My friend has stated that I brought forward corrupted passages 
of the fathers. Was it honorable in him to make such an asser- 
tion, particularly, when he will have an opportunity of cc>nsulting 
^he quotations ? I beg to say, that I have examined in the 
«)iginal with some care the passage from Augustin upon which 
n.y friend has so long dwelt ; and I find that Augustin makes 
ifse of the expression " Catholicis laudantibus evangelium" com- 
mending the gospel — *' vituperantibus Manichaeum" — expres 
sions which throw considerable light upon the passage. My 
<earned opponent has asserted, that the Socinian never could 
be converted on my principles. The fact is otherwise ; for 
So^inians have been converted by the advocates of private 
judgment. My friend has again repeated the position, that the 
children of Protestants n>"«* remain atheists until they arrive at 
the years of discretioB. I be^ ^'*ogelher to deny the truth of the 
assert) )n. Much, I admit, devolves on parents and pastors. 
Their authority I recognize; but authority is one thing 
INFALLIBILITY ANOTHER. Is not a Roman Catholic child 
^iccisely in the same circumstances'? I must be permitted tc 
deny, that chiidien always receive grace in baptism, and appeaJ 
lo scripture in support of my opinion How does the Roir.ati 
Catholic child receive the doctrnes of his churchy if not upon IIm 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 9? 

state^ment of the parent or the priest, a child being quite incapable 
ot exercising its reason on the proofs of the infallibility of the 
church of Rome? In first of Corinthians, 12th chapter, there 
is a beautiful comparison. An analogy is there drawn between 
the church and the human body. The members of the human 
frame contribute mutually to each other's well-being : — 

"The eye cannot say to the hand, I need not thy help ; nor again the head 
to the feet, 1 have no need of you. Yea, much more, those that seem to be 
the more feeble members of the body, are necessary ; and such as we think 
Co be the less honorable members of the body, about these we put more 
abundant honour; and those that are our uncomely parts, have abundant 
comeliness. But our comely parts have no need; but God hath tempered 
tile body together, giving to that which wanted the more abundant honour; 
that there might be no schism in the body, but the members might be mutually 
careful one for another. And if one member suffer any thing, all the members 
suffer with it; or if one member glory, all the members rejoice with it." — v. 
21—26. 

The poor believer, who is acquainted with a person of judg- 
inent and piety, may derive useful information from him ; may 
receive his testimony ; but in doing so, he does not acknowledge 
his infallibility. Thus, each member of the church of Christ, 
contributes to the edification of the whole body; but I deny that 
Any part or the whole is infallible. 

Mr. Maguire insinuates that a man cannot know whether he 
is enlightened by the Holy Spirit. The Apostle says, 

"If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. — Rom. viii, 9. 

Again, "Try your ownselves, if ye be in the faith: prove ye yourselves: 
know you not your ownselves, that Christ Jesus is in you, unless perhaps 
you be reprobates ? — 2 Cor. xiii, 5. 

Would the Apostle use such language, if it were not possible 
to discover whether we are influenced by the grace of God ? 

My friend has reminded us, that *' Faith cometh by hearinaj, 
md hearing by the word of God." It is true that the readirig 
of the scripture is not the only mean by which faith cometh, as 
history and experience testify. The kingdom of God is promoted 
^Y preaching also ; but preaching must be found to accord with 
the word of God, — otherwise there can be no saving faith produced. 
It i« the first time I heard that Beza was a translator of the Bible 
in the time of James I. 

Mr. Maguire, as occasion requires, asserts, that the Bible 
•upports the church, and vice versa, that the church the Bible. 
There is no departure from my principles in first exercising my 
judgment on the proofs of revelation, and subseqently appealing 
to revelation in confirmation of the right of private judgment. 

Mr. Maguire says, that it would be a pity to deprive the poor 
man of his belief, that the Bible is the word of God, by telling 
him that his church is not infallible. I ask, are poor Protes- 
lante, wUo deny the infallihiiity of the church of Rome, as unac- 

9 



-i^d ♦Je DIVINE RIGHT 

quainted with the contents of the revelation ns the poor be "ns^ing 
to the church of Rome ; or do they doubt the genuinen* w, and 
authenticity, and inspiration of the scriptures] Let exp^^rience 
and fa^t testify and answer these quetitions. 

Faith, we are again told, cannot be divine, if it rests upon the 
testimony of man. On my principles, ray faith rests not upon 
the testimony of man, but of God. Truth is revealed by God 
in the sacred volume, and I exercise faith upon that truth. My 
fp'^nJ, on the contrary, would have us to exercise an act of 
'aitn in the infallibility of the church of Rome upon the autboritj 
of the scriptures, regarded merely as an historical narrative. 

.Mr. Maguire's quotations from Luther are probably of a 
similar description with the extract which a Roman Catholic 
Priest lately gave in a sermon, from the table-talk of Luther, 
that " Moses was a hangman." The German word, in more 
polished phraseology, signifies an '* executioner ;" and it is 
plain from the context, that by the word " Moses,'* Luther 
intended to designate the JSIoral Laio, which acts as an execu- 
tioner to those who seek to be justified by their obedience to its 
demands. 

What was the conduct of the Apostles? Did they domineer 
over the faith of the primitive Christians 1 

"Not for that, says the Apostle Paul, we have dominion over your faith, 
but are helpers of your joy." — 2 Cor. i, 23. 

When the Bereans contrasted with the scriptures the preach- 
ing even of an Apostle, are they condemned for not having 
implicitly received his testimony? No, St. Luke, in the seventh 
chapter of Acts, and eleventh verse, writes, 

" Those were more noble than those of Thessalonica, in that they received 
the word with all eagerness, daily searching the scriptures whether these thingi 
were so.^^ 

Here we find the Bereans exercising their judgments on the 
Old Testament, in reference to the preaching of an inspired 
Apostle ; and not only is there no censure passed upon them, 
but, on the other hand, a high eulogium pronounced upon their 
conduct. My friend has quoted the passage—** If an angel 
from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you than that which 
you have received, let him be accursed." Gal. i, 8, 9. la 
not this a direct appeal to us to exercise our judgment upon th€ 
doctrines of a preacher, even though he should descend ^om 
heaven, irradiated with all the brightness of angelic glory? My 
friend's analogy between an appeal to the church of Rome and 
tc Judges, to Parliament and to the house of Lords, falls to the 
ground ; for neither Judges, nor Parliament, nor house of Lords 
are infallible. Judges can only take cognizance of the outward 
act« but the c huicb of Rome would extend its contro' »ver th« 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 9i^ 

mind and conscience. Judges must not be paities in the causes 
which come before them, lest they should be biased by interest 
But the Pope, and his undefined church are a party in the hon« 
ours and emoluments which result from their claim of infallibility. 
We perceive, therefore, that there exists no analogy. Mr, Ma» 
guire has quoted, as if from scripture, the words, " captivating 
the understanding." I do not remember such a text. Mv 
friend has stated, that the principle of private judgment has led 
to the deposing of monarchs. I have before remarked, that the 
principle should be exercised in accordance with sound sense. 
On the other hand, I shall prove that Popes considered them- 
selves justified in deposing sovereigns. I would ask, was it the 
right of private judgment, or the pretension of infallibility, which 
led Gregory VII, to depose Henry, Emperor of Germany! 
Gregory's decree runs thus — 

*' On the part of the Omnipotent God, I forbid Henry to govern the king- 
doms of Germany and Italy. I absolve all his subjects from every oath which 
they have taken or may take to him ; and I excommunicate every pi^rson 
who shall serve him as king. — (Lib. v, Ep. 24.) 

Gregory IX, made the following announcement in the thirteenth 
century — 

**Be it known to all, who are under the dominion of heretics, that they are 
Bet free from every tie of fidelity or duty to them ; all oaths, and soiC;.nn 
engagements to the contrary notwithstanding." — (Lib. v, Tit. 7.) 

The Maynooth Class-book informs us, that — 

" The Pope passed sentence against the Emperor Frederick upon a chai ^e 
of having violated a treaty of peace, and also upon a vehement suspicion of 
ne*t3S). The words of the sentence were these : — 'Inasmuch as we, though 
tin worthy, do stand in the place of Jesus Christ on earth, and to us it was said. 
ill the person of the Apostle Peter, whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be 
oound in heaven,' we having previously used diligent deliberation with our 
brethren and the holy council (the council of Lyons, received as general at 
Maynooth) concerning the above, and many other nefarious excesses, do 
declare the aforesaid prince to be bound in his sins, to be a cast-away, and 
deprived of all honour and dignity ; we denounce him, and deprive him by this 
sentence, absolving his subjects from their oaths of fidelity, ajid by our apos' 
tolical authority, strictly enjoining, that no one shall hereafter obey hi.m aa 
emperor or king." 

Here are examples of the head of the church, by the exercise 
of his authority, deposing kings ; and in one of the instances 
adduced, asserting that the proceeding was sanctioned by a 
general council. 

On the other hand, I assert, that whenever an .individucd in 
the exercise of his judgment has co-operated in deposmg a 
sovereign, he has abused the faculty. 1 argue not for the 
abuses of private judgment. If I find the exercise of private 
judgment to accord with the voice of the God of Nature and 
of Revelationp I maintain that the charges ( f my opponent ar# 



100 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

evciled not against me, but against the Lord of Lords and King 
of Kings. Is it logical to argue from the abuse of a thing 
against its use I Every blessing may be perverted. Learning, 
health, and liberty, may be abused ; but are we, therefore, to 
prefer the iron grasp of tyranny to the sweets of freedom ; and 
are ignorance and debility to be substituted in the room of 
science and of health 1 One word more — the doctrine of infal- 
libility militates against the promises of divine wisdom made to 
them that seek it. The Psalmist says : 

" Open thou mine eyes that I may behold wondrous things out of th^ 
law." — cxix Ps. 18. 

" Thy word is a lamp to my feet, and a light to my paths." — cxix Ps. 105. 

"If ye then being evil," says the Saviour, "know how to give good gifts 
unto your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give his Holy 
Spirit to them that ask him." — Luke, xi, 13. 

" If any man lack wisdom," says St. James, " let him ask of God, who 
giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not, and it shall be given unto 
him."— i, 5. 

If I am to bow implicitly to the dictates of the church of 
Rome, why do I want wisdom ? Why should I exercise my 
judgment by " proving all things and holding fast that which is 
good ?" Monstrous contradiction ! In truth the very fact that 
God has vouchsafed to us a revelation of his will and character, 
evidently implies, that man should exercise his judgment upon 
its contents. I would say in conclusion, therefore, let us all, 
clergy as well as laity, vindicate the right of private judgment. 
The priests, as well as the laics, must answer at the bar of 
judgment. They cannot give account for us. Wo to those who 
f-^llow the direction of ecclesiastics implicitly. It is written, 

"The blind and the leaders of the blind shall both fall into the ditch." 

I fear that quotations from the Fathers are calculated rather to 
^ eaken the impression, which I trust has been made upon youi 
conscience. As, however, a few minutes remain, I shall occupy 
them by reading you a few extracts. St. Augustin says, that 

" The manner of expression in which the holy scripture is framed, although 
It is to be penetrated but by few, is accessible to all. Those plain things 
which it contains, it speaks to the heart of the unlearned and learned, hke a 
familiar friend, without disguise. That mind which is inimical to this doc- 
trine, is either erroneously io;norant that it is most wholesome or loathes the 
Bjedicine from disease." — Epist, 137 ad Volusiaiium. 

Again, " God has bowed the scriptures even to the capacity of babes and 
rick lings, as he hath in another P&alm, he bowed the heavens and came 
down." 

For the exposition of passages which cannot be explained bj 
a comparison with other parts of the sacred volume, Augustio*« 
rule isv not to consult an infallible church, but 

"Let everv one interpret according to his own senae^'* 
" pFOUi ^isque voloerit* — Lib, de unit Ece. t, I& 



OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 101 

8t» Chrysostom says, 

** AH necessary things are manifest*' — Horn, in 2 Thes, 2. 

St. Basil says, 

•*The hearers that are instructed in the scriptures must examine the doo 
lines of their teachers ; they must receive those things which are agreeable 
lo scripture, and reject what are contrary to it." — In Moralium Regula 72^ 
m initio. 

Mr. Maguire — This, perhaps, is the most importaHt half 
hour of the discussion. It remains for this assembly to say 
whether Mr. Pope has at all attempted to get out of the diffi- 
culty — to wit, how a Protestant child could make an act of faith 
upon the inspiration of the scriptures. All Mr. Pope's argu- 
ments went to show that the scriptures are the word of God. Is 
there an individual present who does not entertain a similar 
opinion ? That belief is a common principle between us. I 
only want to show that the Protestant child cannot know the 
scriptures to be the word of God, by the rule which Mr. Pope 
endeavours to establish. — Mr. Pope places the child under cir- 
cumstances which render it impossible for him to make an act 
of faith. Would it not be better for Mr. Pope to show how the 
Protestant child could make an act of faith, than to treat us to a 
sermon on the Bible, quoting St. Augustin as to its utility — a 
thing which I surely never denied. I trust in heaven I shall 
never forbid the reading of the holy Bible, under proper circum- 
stances. St. Augustin speaks of the perusal of the sacred 
scriptures being useful to children ; does he thereby constitute* 
them as infallible authorities to decide upon its meaning? The 
aan who recognizes an infallible authority, believes in articles 
^ faith which he could otherwise never ascertain of himself 
whether they came from God, or were committed to writing by 
men inspired by him. I have shown that Christ left a sure and 
certain guide to direct mankind. If God had not appointed a 
guide to direct man, he would have left the mass of mankind 
involved in ignorance and error. If the Bible contain divi?ie 
truths, of what utility would it be to the ignorant, if they pos- 
sessed not the means of ascertaining whether it be ihe work of 
God '? Mr. Pope has not shown how the ignorant can ascertain 
whether the Bible be the word of God. If the Bible exclusiveh 
contains the word of God, will Mr. Pope show us from the 
Bible, the procession of the Holy Ghost — baptism with the sign 
of the cross— consubstantiality — and that infants may be bap- 
tized contrary to the practice of Christ and his Apostles? I 
understand that Mr. Pope indeed is a dissenter frc^m the church 
of England on those points. But that fact alone proves thai 
there is no unity of doctrines amongst Protestants^ and ih»l 



102 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

while tlie Bible teaches one Protestant to believe one thing, il 
Reaches a second Protestant to believe another thing. There 
are many articles of faith admitted by Protestants, not to be 
found in the Bible. Will Mr. Pope show me from the Bible, 
an authority for changing the Sabbath? Mr. Pope said the 
Apostles broke bread on that day of the week. Why, the Apos- 
tles broke bread upon every day in the week. That was an 
ex(i(;niely weak and foolish argument to introduce to justify 
such a change. It appears that Mr. Pope imagined he had 
caught me in an historical error. He says I have quoted Beza 
as one of those who translated the Bible in the reign of James I. 
I deny the fact — I accused Luther, Beza, and others, of wilfully 
corrupting the Bible ; but not the Bible as translated in James 
Ps reign. Would Mr. Pope insinuate that there were no other 
translations prior to that time ? Has he never heard of one by 
Luther — one by Zuinglius — one by (Ecolampadius, &c, &c1 

Latimer corrupted the text, and bid defiance to all authority — 
•o did Cranmer, and Henry YHI, — he who, after leading a bad 
'.ife, when his end approached, thought only of saving his soul, 
and accordingly returned to that church where certainty and truth 
were alone to be found. But Mr. Pope has given up Henry 
\ HI, Luther, and Cranmer, — he scarcely defended Beza ; and 
he ventured not to whisper a word hi support of Zuinglius, who 
received his doctrine against transubstantiation from a spirit, aJi 
he says himself, nescio an albo, vel nigro. 

Mr. Pope talks of a Catholic clergyman having misquoted 
Luther, in asserting that Luther called Moses a hangman. Mr. 
Pope says he only calls him an executioner. What is an exe- 
cutioner but a hangman 1 I deny that Mr. Pope interprets the 
German text correctly. I have the original work of Luther, in 
German, here on the table, and the celebrated Pichler says that 
the word employed by Luther does mean hangman. 

As to Mr. Pope's arguments respecting the deposing power 
assumed by some pontiffs — I never said the Popes wfere infalli- 
ble. Moreover, Christ did not combine the quality of impecca- 
Dility with the prerogative of infallibility. Judas did not lose his 
faith when he betrayed his master — and Christ says to Peter,— 

" But I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not ; and thou being once 
eon verted, confirm thy brethren." — (Luke, xxii, 32.) 

Infallibility and impeccability are not then inseparable, as Mr. 
Pope would maintain. Out of nearly three hundred Popes, 
there are only eleven whose conduct and lives can be airaigned 
as absolutely criminal. Who is there here that has not com- 
mitted sin ? Let him who is spotless throw the first stone. 
We hear enough of " saints" in these days — but we know thai 
ow Saviour compared the Pharisees to white-washed sepulcl^'^es 



OF PRlVAir. JUDGMENT. 103 

It is easy enough to assuAiva thv^ appearance of sanctity, a jd ta 
put on a puritanical face. I again ask Mr. Pope how the Pro- 
testant child can be led hy internal evidence to make an act oi 
faith, and that too upon the Bible, before he can know that it is 
the word of God 1 I repeat the question which I have already 
urged respecting the Socinian. Does not Mr. Pope violate th€ 
principle of private judgment when he endeavours to force his 
interpretation of the scriptures upon the Socinian ? Has nol 
the Socinian as good a right to attack the private judgment of 
Mr. Pope 1 If I could not convince the Socinian of the divinity 
of Christ by the authority of the church, I would not, at all 
events, go in direct opposition to my avowed and well known 
principles. I would force upon him the general agreement of 
nations which ascribes to Christ the establishment of a church, 
and of an infallible guide. As I said already, I would shame 
him into conviction, by appealing to the consent of nations, all 
differing from each other on other subjects, and yet agreeing in 
this point — I w^ould prove that the vox Populi was here truly the 
vox Dei. I would show him the voice of God in the church, 
und that he was, therefore, called upon to obey. If I left him 
unconvinced I would enjoy this advantage over Mr. Pope, that 
he could not charge me with self-contradiction. But the diffi- 
culties which Mr. Pope would have to encounter with the Soci- 
nian are insuperable. The Socinian would say, that he could 
not conscientiously believe that a God could suffer death — he 
would not allow it, because he would say it was against reason. 
In vain w^ould Mr. Pope adduce against him the evidence of the 
Bible. The Socinian would appeal to the grand charter of 
gospel liberty, the rig^ht of private judgment. If the Bible can 
be interpreted by private judgment, I should like to know from 
Mr. Pope, with the aid of his internal illumination, what is the 
meaning of that passage in Zacharias, where the prophet says, 
*' upon one stone there are seven eyes." I should also like to 
know from him, w'hy did God forbid fish to be offered by the 
Jews in sacrifice 1 And why did God command the Jews nol 
to wear drugget ? Can Mr. Pope interpret these difficult .las- 
9agt!s ? Are there ten Protestants here who will give the s-ame 
interpretation to any one text of scripture? Will it be said, that 
Jhe Holy Glijst can infuse the spirit of contradiction. Every 
heretic may have recourse to this rule of private judgment, and 
by it justify his err3rs. It is good for society that obedience be 
rendered to human power — why not also to spiritual power '^ 
If a fallible authority is to be obeyed by man, when he is not 
able to live by himself, a fortiori^ he should yield obedience to 
an infallible authority .n the great and important concern of his 
salvation. If temporal power be not established in society, 



104 THE DIVINE RIGHT 

neither order nor regularity will exist. A similar authoiiti 
should exist in the spiritual society instituted by Christ. Ifi* 
be a fact, that the church of Christ could teach error, then the 
more perfect dispensation of the Son of God, did not leave us 
any thing equal to the Jewish synagogue, which, until his com- 
ing, did not err in the faith. And yet Mr. Pope will have it, 
that the church of Christ has erred. 

Mr. Pope will not yield his assent to that which is borne out 
)jy the general consent of many and different nations from the first 
era of Christianiiy. The principle which Mr. Pope advocates 
are those upon which Arius and Eutyches, Cerinthus, and all 
other heretics, ground their defence. They are the principles 
which inspired the wild men and women in Germany, who 
danced naked through the streets, shouting aloud that the king- 
doms of the earth were given unto them, with an army of fifty 
J'housand to make good their claims. These are instances, I 
wil) be told, of the abuse of private judgment, but they are abuses 
necessarily flowing from the principle itself. I would ask, when 
the principle is once granted, where is the guarantee against ts 
abuse. Is it to be unlimited in its nature ; or will Mr. Pope 
venture to draw out the line of demarcation ? Or rather, will he 
not — must he not, to be at all consistent, allow every individual 
to do as he pleases ? 

Jesus Christ is the real high priest— the corner-stone of his 
church, and the Apostles and their successors are the super- 
structure, teaching and preaching, through the guidance of the 
Holy Ghost, 

" And I will ask the Father (says our Saviour to his Apostles) and he 
shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever." — 
John, xiv, 16. 

I shall again put the question (which I have so often repeated) 
in due form to Mr. Pope, and if he be a sincere lover of truth, I 
expect an answer from him in plain and obvious terms. I call 
upon him to point out in what manner a Protestant child, before 
he arrives at the years of discretion, can make an act of faith 
or how he can ascertain the authority of the scriptures 1 H« 
must remain a doubter, and consequently an infidel, flut the 
Catholic has but one single, solitary fact to establish, namely, 
the authority of the church ; in arriving at that, he is at liberty 
to exercise his judgment, but when he has once ascertained the 
fact, he yields to the church unlimited obedience in matters oi 
faith. But the Protestant possesses no such means to enable 
him to make an act of faith. All great writers have seen this 
difficulty. It was acknowledged by Claude in the ceUjbrated 
discussion with Bossuet, and he endeavoured to throw it back 
on Bossuet, as Mr. Pope has attempted to do with me. 



THE DOCTKINE OF PURGATORY. 105 

But I have shown that the CathoHc can make the act of faith, 
ifter he has ascertained the simple fact of the church's authority. 
While the Protestant must ascertain that every single text o/ 
scripture is inspired, and that all are preserved pure and uii 
changed, as they were originally written by the Apostles. The 
Protestant must travel through this impracticable inquiry, there- 
fore it is impossible that he can make an act of faith. While. 
on the contrary, the Catholic has simply to ascertain the author- 
ity of the church, and then to yield obedience to it. It was for 
that purpose Christ left us his church upon earth ; and St. Petei 
says of the scriptures — 

"In vhich there are some things hard to be understood, which the un 
learned and unstable wrest, as also the other scriptures, to their own perdi- 
tion.''— (2 Peter, iii, 16.) 

It is manifest, then, that there must exist an authority to direct 
us in the interpretation of the sacred volume. 

I beg to conclude this da.y^s discussion, by apologizing for 
the many disadvantages under which I labor. I am not able to 
engage your fancy by language shining and sparkling as a bottle 
of champaign. I possess not the powers of oratory to catch the 
feelings, and to lead captive the understandings of my auditory. 
If truth did not combat on my side, how is it possible that a man 
like me, who cannot boast of much learning — who has been foi 
years engaged in the laborious duties of the mission, and totally 
estranged from the pursuits of literature, could meet and oppose» 
by sound arguments, the reasonings of a man hke Mr. Pope, 
who has devoted his hfe to the study of this subject, and whc 
has nothing else to occupy his attention. 



Third Day. — Saturday, April 21. 



SUBJECT.—** The Doctrine of Purgatory ^ 

At eleven o'clock the chair was taken by Admiral Or.ivBft 
liid John O'Brien, Esq., of Elmvale. 

Mr. Pope rose, and called on Mr. Maguire for his proofs nl 
the doctrine of Purgatory, 

Mr. Maguire. — Gentlemen, I appear this day at the bar oi 
pubhc opinion, to defend a doctrine in which we are all equally 
concerned — that there do exist prejudices against that doctrine 
amongst many of my Protestioit countrymen is too notoriouii 



106 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

to be questioned. If I should be happy enough to remove anj^ 
of them, it will be doing much for your salvation, and will afford 
me sincere pleasure. If this doctrine of purgatory be once 
removed, — if this most consolatory dogma be discarded v-you 
must then resort to the dreadful alternative of believing that the 
moment the soul is departed from the body, it is either plunged 
»br eternity into the depths of hell, or borne triumphantly by the 
angels of God into the realms of endless bliss. Is there any 
person here so presumptuous as to say, that he expects with 
confidence, the moment of his dissolution to appear before a 
merciful but essentially just Judge, white as the snows of hea- 
ven, and pure as the angels of God ] I wish any man who may 
possess it joy of such confidence — most assuredly it is not mine. 

Before I proceed to my direct proofs of purgatory, (for I only 
deal in direct arguments) I may here remind you, though per- 
haps I am not strictly in order in so doing, that I proposed 
yesterday three arguments to my learned friend, at which, as 
appears to me, he has scarcely condescended to glance. I 
asked him what was the last resolution of an act of faith in the 
m\nd of a Protestant. I called upon him to explain to the 
ss tisfaction of the meeting, how a Protestant on taking the Bible 
*n''o his hands, could make an act of divine faith upon the abso- 
lu>e inspiration of the sacred scriptures. I called upon him to 
«how, by what means he could make any rational impression 
upon the mind of the Socinian, who admits the scriptures, and 
\v)'0 also admits the right of private judgment in common with 
M \ Pope. I wanted him to show how he would impress upon 
iht' mind of the Socinian, that fundamental doctrine of Chrj.s- 
Saaity — the divinity of Jesus Christ. The moment Mr. Pope 
M empis to press his particular interpretation on the Socinian, 
vb } latter claims an equal right to choose his own interpretation 
ol the text — he tells Mr. Pope, that he is violating the principle 
of private judgment, and that he should not monopolize and 
appropriate to himself, that which was every man's birth-right. 
He asserts, moreover, that his interpretation is more rational 
than that of Mr. Pope, who proposes a doctrine (he will say) 
opposed to human reason, and to common sense. When, there- 
fore, Mr. Pope should propose to the Socinian, doctrines above 
human comprehension, he justly claims his own right of private 
judgments he weighs all mysteries in the scale of human reason, 
and taxes Mr. Pope with a violation of his hereditary right. 

I asked Mr. Pope, how he could, with the Bible in his hand, 
convert the benighted pagan? The latter in search of truth, 
takes up the scriptures, reads therein severa^ passages, which, 
to a mind not endowed with spiritual light, may appear to sane- 
Uon the most desperate crimes : he is beset on all sides by tht 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORf. 10? 

objections of deists and atheists — of Voltaire, Diderow, Rous- 
seau, Julian the apostate, Celsus, Porphyry, &c. And if St. 
Augustin had to write four large volumes to reconcile the four 
evangelists, is it not plain that the half-converted infidel must 
have recourse to the authoiity of the church, to solve all his 
diflicuUies, and remove his doubts? or, if he would not trust to 
that authority, he must be able to explain away all the objections 
of the deists — to compare and examine every passage in the 
Bible ; he must prove the authenticity, the integrity and tho 
inspiration of the scriptures, — and here is a task, which I hum- 
bly conceive Mr. Pope himself is not adequate to perforni. 
The.se are the three points which I have repeatedly urged upon 
(he attention of Mr. Pope, and which he has not met to the 
satisfaction of this meeting. 

1 now come to my direct proofs of Purgatory. I shall first 
state what is the doctrine of the Catholic church on the subject. 
According to the Roman Catholic faith, w'e believe that after 
the Almighty God has forgiven the sins actually committed by 
man, as to the eternal punishment a temporal pumshmeat may be 
annexed by God as the effect of sin, and may remain after the 
eternal punishment has been remitted. This temporal penalty 
may be inflicted in this life, or may be inflicted in the next. 
Thus, after the fall of Adam, though his sin was washed out b\ 
faith in a future Saviour's blood, still death remai-^ed as the tem- 
poral punishment and consequence of the original sin of Adam. 

When David was guilty of the double crime of adultery and 
murder, and when the prophet Nathan announced to him, upon 
the authority of God himself, that his crimes were forgiven by 
' \.e Lord of Hosts, he at the same time annexed to the forgive- 
ness of the eternal penalty a temporal punishment, for he declared 
10 David that his adulterous offspring should not live. David 
wept bitterly^ — he bedewed the sheets of his bed with tears, ar.d 
he besought the Lord that his child might live ; but the child 
died, and this was a temporal punishment annexed to the sin, 
after the eternal had been forgiven. Catholics do not hold that 
there is any particular fire in purgatory. The church has not 
taken upon herself to determine where purgatory exists ; — all 
she has defined in the council of Trent, which is very explicit on 
the subject, is, to pronounce it an article of faith, that there 
exists a third place, where the soul of some go after death, and 
where they are detained by Almighty God, till they are purified 
and prepared for heaven. That, after a certain detention there, 
through the mercy of God, and the prayers and suffrages of the 
faithful on earth, they are received into heaven. This is a plain 
dogma. It has nothing to do with racks, tortures, or fires, or 
many other things with which, no doubt, in the mjads of sctm 



108 THE DOCTRINE t F PURGATORY. 

present, the doctrine of purgatory has been heretofore associated 
It now remains with you to see what are the proofs of purgatory, 
and what the motives of credibility which induce C-othoHcs to 
believe in that doctrine. The first text I shall quote to yoii is 
from 8t. Matthew, ch. v, ver. 25, 26. 

"Make an agreement with thy adversary qirckly, whilst thou art in the 
way with him ; lest perhaps the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and t\tt* 
judge deliver thee to the otficer, and thou be cast into prison. Amen, 1 sav 
to thee, thou shalt not go out from thence, till thou pay the last farthing," 

It is very clear that the woids here ** whilst thou art in the 
way," mean whilst in this life ; and that the expression which 
follows, " lest thy adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the 
judge to the officer, and thou be cast into prison,'' from whence 
there is no release till the last farthing shall be paid, means, lest 
ihou shalt be overtaken by death, who comes like a thief in the 
night, and be cast into purgatory, where the last farthing shall 
be paid — that is, all your sins must be expiated by suffering:, 
before you shall be re'eased, and admitted into the regions of 
bliss. I pretend not to give a particular description of the place 
to which the sacred text alludes, but I leave the passage to make 
its due impression upon the mind of every honorable Protestant. 
The next passage I shall cit-e is from St. Matthew, ch. xii, ver. 
32, 36. 

"And whosoever shall speak a *vord against the Son of man, it shall be 
forgiven him; but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not 
be forgiven hin;, either in this world, or in the world to come. But 1 say 
unto you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall render an 
account for it in the day of judgment." 

Here our Saviour makes the utterance of a single idle word a 
sin to be accounted for at the day of judgment. Is the suppo- 
sition violent that a man may suddenly expire after the expression 
of an idle word. That idle word does not constitute a mortal 
Mn sufficient to damn him for ever ; it is that species of sin to 
which the prophet alludes when he says, that the just man falls 
seven times a-day. He could not be a just man if these were 
mortal sins. If then a man be suddenly carried off in an apo- 
plectic fit, and cannot enter heaven on account of the utterance 
of a single word, where does he go! I beg leave to refer you to 
the 1st Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, iii, 8, 12, 13, 14,15. 

"Now he who plantcth, and he who vvatereth are one. And every one 
shall receive reward according to his own labour. Now if any man build 
upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; ever) 
man's work shall be made manifest ; for the day of the Lord shall declare it, 
because it shall be revealed by fire ; and the fire shall try every man's work 
of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon ; 
he shall receive a reward. If any man's work b irn he shall suffer loss ; but 
be himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire." 

I may here remark, what I shall pr< ve — that of seventeec 



THE DOCTRINL OF PURGATC RY. 109 

holy fathers of the 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th centuries, frorn whose 
works I shall hereafter give you ample quotations, there is not 
one, with the exception of two, that does not refer to the foregoing 
t3xt in proof of the existence of purgatory. I shall only say 
that if any passages shall be adduced from scripture, against 
purgatory clearer than this text, which is manifestly in support 
of that doctrine, I will then acknowledge that I am wrong. 1 
•hall next refer you 3o 2d Corinthians, i, 11. 

*' You," St. Paul says, " helping withal in prayer for us ; that for this gift 
obtained for us by many persons thanks may be given by many in our behalf.' 

St. Paul here begs the prayers of the Corinthians— -these 
prayers, it is true, were for the living — and / therefore am not for 
contending that this text is a clear one in favor of purgatory. 
But if prayers for the living be justifiable and proper, I cannot 
undersand why prayers for the dead should be condemned. 
Again, 1st Peter, iii, 18, 19, 20. 

"Because Christ also died once for our sins, the just for the unjust, that he 
might offer us to God, being put to death indeed in the flesh, but brought to 
life by the spirit. In which also he came and preached to those spirits who 
were in prison ; who in time past had been increduk^us when they waited for 
the patience of God in the days of Noe, when the ark was a building; in 
which few, that is eight souls, were saved by water. 

Here we find a prison spoken of, into which Christ entered 
and preached to the dead. Here is a manifest acknowledgment 
of a third place. The creed says, that Christ descended into 
hell — surely not into the hell of the damned — for it is recorded, 
that Christ released those who were detained therein. Will it 
be shown that the place referred to in this text^ and into which 
Christ entered has ceased to exist 1 

Our Saviour says, Matt, xii, 32, 

"And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be 
forgiven him ; but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not 
be forgiven him, neither in this world nor in the world to come." 

Now as St. Augustin justly remarks, in commenting on this 
passage, if no sin can be forgiven in the world to come, the 
argument of Christ has lost its force ; and as in that case it 
would be equally impossible to obtain forgiveness in the world to 
come for sins against the Father and the Son, as for those against 
the Holy Ghost, the passage would mean nothing. I shall add 
to the quotations which I have already given, the following from 
the 2d book of Maccabees, xii, 43 We find it there recorded, 
that Judas Maccabeus 

"Making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to J?ru- 
salem for sacrifice, to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and 
religiously concerning the resurrection." 

And it is added, "It is therefore a holy and iiholesome thought to oraj Am 
the dead, that they may be loosed from^ their sin 3." 

10 



110 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGAT0R7. 

I am well aware that we shall hear arguments urged against 
Ihe caiionicity of this book. But I shall only use it as an 
historical testimony for the present ; and as such it proves, that 
Judas Maccabeus offered up prayers for the dead, "deeming it 
a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they 
may be loosed from their sins." 

As an historical record, it testifies that the practice of praying 
fioi' the dead existed among the Jews. When Christ condemned 
the fables and inventions of the Pharisees, why did he not point 
his indignant censure against this practice, and condemn this 
portion of the public worship of the Jews as superstitious, or 
unjustifiable] I would wish much that Mr. Pope would adhere 
to strict argument and logical deduction. It will be in vain for 
him to meet direct arguments, drawn from Scripture, and from 
the practice of tne church during the tirst five hundred years of 
the Christian sera, by an historical quibble. Such a subterfuge 
exposes the weakness of his arguments. 

I shall now proceed to lay before you various quotations from 
the fathers on the present subject, and I pledge myself to their 
accuracy and authjn deity. Tertullian says, De Corona Militum, 
p. 209, 

"Amonor the Apostolical traditions received from our fathers, we have 
oblations for the dead ^/n the anniversary day — obiationes pro defunctis annua 
die faciinus." 

In his treaties Oti Monogamy, cap. x, p. b5b^ he thus advisea 

a widow — 

*'Pray for the soul of your departed husband, entreating repose to him and 
participation in the fir^st resurrection — making oblations for him on tlie anni- 
versaries of his death, which, if you neglect, it may be truly said of you, that, 
f B far as in you lies, you have repudiated your husband." 

And addressing widowers, he says, exhortatio ad castitateni, 
cap. ix, 

" Reflect for whose soul you pray — for whom, you make annual oblations. 
Pro cujus spiritu postules — pro qua obIa.tiones annuas reddas." 

The holy Father and Martyr, Cyprian, who lived in the 2d 
century, says, 

"Our predecessors prudently advised, that no brother departing this life 
§bould nominate any churchman his executor; and should he do it, that no 
oblation should be made for him, nor sacrince oti'ered for his repose — of which 
we have had a late example, when no oblation was made, nor prayer in his 
name offered in the church." — Epist. i, p. 2. 

And again — *'It is one thing to be a petitioner for pardon, and another to 
Arrive at glory ; one to be cast into prison and not to go out from thence till 
the last farthing be paid, and another to receive at once the reward of faith 
ftnd virtue ; one, in punishment of sin, to be purified by long sufTering, and 
pursed long by fire — and another to have expiated all sinss by (previous; 
luffering; one, in fine, at the day of judgment, to wait the sentence of thi 
Lord ; another to receive an immediate crown from him." — Epist. cv, p. lOSk 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY, 111 

Oi gen (Homily 6. in Exod. tome ii. n. 148), says, 

"He that is saved is saved by fire ; so that if he has in him any triing ot 
iie nature of lead that the fire may purge, and reduce it till the mass leco nt 
pure gold. Gtui salvus fit per ignem salvus fit ut id ignis decoquat, et resolvat 
For the gold of that land which the saints are to inhabit is said to be pure, 
3ind AS 'the furnace trieth gold, so doth temptatation try ihe just.' — Eccleg. 
27. We must then all come to this proof, 'for the Lord sits as a refiner, 
(Mai iii, 3,) and he shall purify the sons of Levi.' But when we sliall arrive 
at that place, who shall bring many good works, and little that is evil; this 
evil the fire shall purify as it does lead, and the whole shall become pure gold. 
FJe that takes with him more of lead, sufferiS the fire more, that he may be 
refined, and what little there is of geld, after the purification, remains. Bu* 
should the whole mass be lead, that man must experience what is written: 
*lhe Bca covered them; they sank as lead in the mighty waters.' — Exod. xv, 
10. Sin in its nature is hke to that matter which fire consumes, and which 
th'^ Apostle says is built up by sinners, who upon the foundation of Christ 
build wood, hay, and stubble.' — 1 Cor. iii, 12. Which words manifestly show, 
that th^re are some sins so light as to be compared to stubble ; to which, 
when fire is set it cannot dwell long — cui utique ignis illatus diu non pv^test 
immorari : that there are others like to hay, which the fire easily consumes, 
t)ut a little more slowly than it does stubble ; and others resemble wood, in 
which, according to the degree of criminality, the fire finds an abundant 
substance on which to feed. Thus each crime, in proportion to its character, 
experiences a just degree of punishment. 

" When we depart this life, if we take with us virtues or vices, shall we 
receive rewards for our virtues, and those trespasses be forgiven to us which 
we knowingly committed; or shall we be punished for our faults and not 
-eceive the rewards of our virtues? Neither is true: because we shall suffer 
tor our sins, and receive the rewards of our good actions. For if on the 
foundation of Christ you shall have built not only gold and silver, and precious 
stones, but also wood, and hay, and stubble, what do you expect, when ine 
same shall be separated from the body ? Would you enter into heaven with 
your wood, and hay, and stubble, to defile the kingdom of God ; or, on 
account of those incumbrances, receive no reward for your gold and silver, 
and precious stones? Neither is this just. It remains, then, that you be 
committed to the fire, which shall consume the light materials ; for our God, 
to those who can comprehend heavenly things, is called a consuming fire. 
Hwi this fire consumes not the creature, but what the creature has himself 
Vjuilt — wood, and hay, and stubble. Frst, therefore, we suffer on account of 
our transgressions, and then we receive our reward." — Homily, xvi, in 
Jerome, tom. iii. 

I have here thirty- five quotations from Origen, all to the samt) 
effect, and m every one of which he alludes to the text of St. 
Paul relative to the hay, wood, and stubble, and the consequent 
purgation by fire. 

Eusebius of Ctesarea, who belonged to the Greek church, 
describing the funeral of the emperor Constantino the (rreat, 
Ih s writes — 

"In this manner did Constantius perform the last duties in honour of hia 
father. But when he had departed with his guards, the ministers of God, 
iorrounded by the multitude of the faithful, advanced into the middle space, 
and with prayers performed the ceremonies of divine wot3hi| : the blessed 
prince, reposing in his coffin, was extolled with many .^raises ; when the 
people in concert with the priests, not without sighs and tea^ , offered prayeri 
k) heaven for his soul ; in this manifesting the most acceptable service to t 



112 THE DOCTRINE OF PUKGATORT. 

religious pnnce. God thus gave him a place near the bodies of the hoN 
Apostles, in order that he may enjoy their blessed fellowship, and in theil 
temple be associated with the people of God. He would thus also be admittea 
to a participation in the religious rites, the mystic sacrifice, and holy suffrage! 
of the faithful."— De Vita Constant. Lib. xi. 

Arnobius, the master of Lactantius, and rhetorician at Sicca, in 
Nuinidia, who lived about the end of the 3rd century, thus writes : 

" Why were the oratories (of the Christians) destined to savage destruction 
wherein prayers are offered up to the sovereign God ; peace and pardon ar« 
implored for all men, magistrates, soldiers, kings, friends, and enemies, roi 

THOSE WHO ARE ALIVE, AND FOR THOSE WHO HAVE QUITTED THEIR BODIES?' 

St. Basil 

" The words of Isaiah, * Through the wrath of the Lord is the land burned, 
(ix, 19,) declare, that things which are earthly shall be made the food of a 
punishing fire to the end, that the same may receive favour and be benefitted.' 
* And the people shall be as fuel of the fire.' — (Ibid.) This is not a threat of 
5xtermination, but it denotes expurgation^ according to the expression of the 
apostle ; ' If any man's works burn, he shall suffer loss ; but he himself 
shall be saved, yet so as by fire.' — (1 Cor. iii, 15.) — Com. cap. ix, Isaiah, 
Tome i, p. 554. 

" ' And the light of Israel shall be for a fire.' — (Isaiah x, 17.) The operative 
powers of fire are chiefly tw o — it enlightens and it burns. The first is cheerial 
and pleasant — the second bitter and afflicting. The prophet adds, 'and ht 
shall sanctify him in a holy fire, and consume the glory of his forest as grass.' 
He here shows the nature of the fire — it enhghtens and purifies. But how 
does this fire puiify, if it consumes ? Truly, since our God is called *a con- 
suming fire,' he will consume the wood, and what vices arise from matter 
which adheres to the soul in the flesh, not in the spirit. And when the fire 
shall have consumed all the wood of sin, as it does grass, then that matter 
oeing destroyed, which was fuel to the chastising fire, the prophet sayu, 
'The burnt mountains shall repose, and the hills, and the thick forests, ani 
the consuming fire shall cease that fed upon them.' " — Ibid. p. 563. 

I do not envy Mr. Pope, if he deem his private judgment 
superior to the texts which I have quoted, and to the judgnient 
of the holy Fathers for five hundred years. 1 defy him to answer 
the following syllogistic argument : — Either the Fathers, at the 
period when they wrote, published that which was the estabhshed 
belief of the Catholic church, or they did not? If they did 
publish what was the doctrine in their time, then such doctrine 
must have been true, since the church is acknowledged on all 
hands to have been pure in the primitive ages of Christianity? 
If the Fathers published that which was not the established 
doctrine of the church, why did not the pure church protest, and 
not sanction error by her silence ; and why did not the heretics 
protest, against whom those doctrines were advanced ? 

Mr. Pope rose and said, — My learned adversary commenced 
his observations by addressing himself to our fears. He spoke 
of the dreadful idea of being hu»rried instantaneously, either into 
tke presence of Infinite HoHness, or into the regions of eterna 
WQ* la order to alleviate thDse fears, he proposes to us the fire oi 



THE DOCTRINE OF FURGATORY. 113 

purgatory ; of thu purgatory, in which the church of Rome lells 
tts, that some souls have been confined for more than a thousand 
years. My friend has adverted to the questions which he pro- 
posed yesterday. As my answers are already before tb public 
who can decide whether they are satisfactory, I shall not follo\^ 
Mr. Maguire through his devious ramblings. I shall mere}} 
observe, that he has this morning brought forward several argu* 
ments, in addilion to those which he advanced yesterday, employee 
by infidels in their denial of the inspiration of the sacred scrip* 
tures. How did Mr. Maguire act yesterday? Instead ol 
coming in a manly manner to the real question, he confined me 
to an extreme case. He asked me, by what mode I could 
convince an ignorant man that the Bible is the word of God ? 
In reply, I enquired by what arguments he could convince him. 
Tou have heard the answers of both. 1 remarked, that in de- 
monstrating to the illiterate man, that the scriptures were divine, 
I would appeal only lo the internal evidence^ which commends 
Itself to the conscience, as having the impress of divine truth 
engraven upon it. I again ask, did not Mr. Maguire as well as 
myself appeal to the private judgment of the individual? Mk 
Maguire would refer to the universal consent of mankind ! ( 
would ask, must not the ignorant man, in order to decide wheth )\ 
this universal consent exists in support of the sacred volurre, 
must he not wade through the many tomes of the Fathers ? I, 
therefore, again submit, upon whose part the greater difficulty 
exists, in convincing the ilhterate person that the Bible is divine '* 
In order to show, that, while the eternal punishment of sin is for- 
given,its temporal punishment may remain, my friend has referred 
us to the cases of Adam and David. I readily admit, that wbile 
the Lord forgives the sins of his people, he frequently chastens 
them in this life^ when they act inconsistently with their profes- 
gion, and cause the adversary to blaspheme. The Lord says, 

"When my people forsake my law, I will visit their transgressions with 8 
rod ; nevertheless my loving-kindness will I not utterly take from him, nor 
suffer my faithfulness to fall. — Psalm Ixxxix, 30, 33. 

"The lord chastens those whom he loves and scourges every son wiiorr 
he receives." — Heb. xii, 6. 

But I would ask, because God, in his infinite wisdom sees fit, 
when his people depart from him, to visit them with trials in this 
life* does this fact furnish any reason for supposing, that the 
Deity will extend that punishment into another world? By no 
means ; there is not the slightest ground in scripture for an 
opinion, altogether so unworthy of the character of God. My 
friend observes, that the church of Rome has not defined the 
nature of the fire of purgatory. Cardinal Bellarmine, however, 
Xates, that the damned, and the souls in purgatory are tormented 

10* 



tl4 THE DOCTRINE OF FURGATORY 

in the same fire, and yet Mr. Maguire has informed us, that the 
doctrine of purgatory is a most comfortable doctrine! ! The 
Reverend Gentlen an has quoted the fifth of Matthew and 26th 
verse. It certain y appears to me strange, that a doctrine of 
such importance should, in the very first instance be made to res* 
upun a parable, the very explanation of which, as given by M. 
Maguire himself, proves that it is parabolic. I shall now examine 
it, and set before you its true meaning. The passage runs thuSf 

"Make an agreement with thy adversary quickly, whilst thou art in the 
way with him, lest perhaps the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the 
judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. Amen, I say 
unto thee, thou shalt not go out from thence, till thou pay the last farthing." 

I argue thus ; if the uttermost farthing be paid, then are the sins 
of the individual not pardoned ; for where the uttermost farthing 
is paid, there can be no pardon wanting; and on the contrary, 
if the sins are pardoned^ then is the uttermost farthing not paid. 
My friend talks of the honesty of his views and intentions, 
and of his candour in giving his opinions : I trust, that I can 
appeal with equal confidence to the integrity of my conduct. 
My view of the passage before us is, that the punishment, of 
which our Saviour speaks, is eternal in its duration. The Re- 
deemer appears desirous of showing in the parable, that there 
van be no hope of escape from that place, which he designates 
"^ prison," to that individual who dies in the rejection of the 
g<^spel. Several considerations are fitted to show us, that the 
punishment of which the Saviour speaks, is everlasting. The 
glory of God is infinite ; our debt, if not remitted, infinite ; the 
sinfulness of sin, infinite. Even according to the standard of 
this world, an offence is considered to rise in magnitude, In 
proportion to the dignity of the individual against whom it is 
committed ; a libel upon the character of a private person, is 
treason when committed against a sovereign. The God against 
whom we have rebelled, is King of Kings, and Lord of Lords ; 
our sins, therefore, being committed against infinite Majesty, 
unless blotted out in the atoning blood of Jesus, must for ever 
remain against us, and call down an interminable retribution. 
I shall quote a passage from a note in the Douay Bible, which 
fully justifies the view that I have taken of the expression, ^^ until 
thou hast paid," ivhich implies thai it shall never be paid. The 
comment is on Matt, i, 25. 

*' ' Till she brought forth her first-born son.' — From these words, Helvidma 
fend others heretics most hnpiousiy inferred, that the blessed Virgin Mary had 
other children besides Christ. But St Jerome shows, by divers examples, 
that this expression of the Evangelist was a manner of speaking usual among 
the Hebrews, to denote by the word untily <ynly what is done, ivithout any r«- 
^ard t the future; Thus, it is said. Gen. viii, 6, 7, That j^oah sent forth « 
^aven whi. k went forth, and did not return, until the xraters were dried upon 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 114 

(he earth; that is, did not return any more. Also, in Isaiah, xlvi, 4, God 
lays, ' / am till you ^row old,^ Who dare infer, that God should then cease 
to be? Also, in the first book of Maccabees, verse 54: ^ Jlnd they went up 
to Mount Sion^ wun joy and gladness, and offered holocausts, because not one oj 
them was slain, till they had returned in peace.^ Thnt is, not one was slain 
btfore or after they had returned. God saith to his divine Son, * Sit on my 
right hand, till I make thy enemies thy fotslooV Shall he sit no longer aftei 
his enemies are subdued ? Yea, and for all eternity ! !" 

Mr. Maguire referred to the passage in Matt, xii, 32. 

"Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be for« 
given him ; but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be 
lorgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come." 

?s ow, I beg to observe, that the phrase, '' this world," and 
" the world to come," was current among the Jews, and denoted 
time in general. The Redeemer, I maintain, signified thereby, 
that tne sin should never be forgiven. We should compare 
scripture with scripture, spiritual things with spiritual things, one 
passage with another. Thus in Mark iii, 29, and Luke xii, 10, 
we find the correspondent passages thus expressed : 

"But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, shall never havj 
foriiiveMess, but shall be guilty of an everlasting sin. And whosoever speak* 
etli a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him : but to him that 
shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven." 

The Jews expected under the Me& jiah a fuller dispensation of 
pardon than under the Mosaic economy. Our Lord here informs, 
them of a sin, which, even under the privileges of the Christian 
dispensations, (see Heb. x, 28, 29,) is evidently, according to 
the text, unpardonable. The church of Rome has made an 
unhappy distinction between the greatness of one sin and another 
in the sight of God. It should be remembered, that "he who 
oflTendeth in one point," is stated by St. James, " to be guilty 
of all."— xi, 10. 

Mr. Maguire has observed, that nothing unclean entereth into 
the kingdom of heaven. Granted ; but I maintain, that the true 
purgatory is the fountain which has been opened for sin and for 
uncleanness, in the atoning blood of Jesus. My opponent has 
referred to the third chapter of the first Corinthians. We can 
without difficulty prove, that this passage does not support 
purgatory. When it is said, that " the fire shall irij every man's 
work ;" it is manifest that the fire is 'probatory^ and not purga* 
torial. There is not a being in existence who does nc^t commit 
those sins, for which, according to Mr. Maguire, men must go 
through the fire of purgatory. Again — it is said, 

" Every man's work shall be made manifest of w^hat sort it is." 

Whence it is evident, that the works of the good and of the eviJ 
alike must endure the trying process. Does not this fact shof^ 
diat the fire is a fire of trial, not of purgation. 



116 THE DOCTRINE OF KTRGATORY. 

Fuither — it is the %vork^ the doctrine of the individual, >\ fiich 
is to be tried in this fire, and not his soul. The minister of the 
gospel is not to add to its fundamental truths, but to preach it in 
all its native simplicity ; while the man who corrupts it with 
false philosophy, and builds upon it wood, hay, stubble, if ht 
holds the head Christ Jesus, will be saved, yet so as by fire ; tha* 
is, with extreme difficulty. 

My friend referred to the first of Peter, iii, 19, 20. 

"Christ also died once for our sins, the just for the unjust, that he migit 
offer us to God, being put to death indeed in the flesh, but enlivened in the 
spirit, in which also conning, he preached to those spirits which had been 
some time incredulous, when they awaited for the patience of God, in the 
days of Noe, when the ark was building, wherein a few, that is eight souls, 
were saved by water." — Douay Bible. 

Mr. Mag'uire is aware, that according to the church of Rome, 
only two descriptions of persons go to purgatory ; those who die 
in venial sins, or those who die absolved from the guilt of mortal 
sin. In Roman Catholic catechisms, mortal sins are enumerated. 
The character of those persons who perished in the flood, as 
described in the book of Genesis, proves that they died in 
mortal sin : 

"God seeing that the wickedness of men was great on the earth, and tha 
all the thoughts of their hearts were bent upon evil at all times, it repentea 
him that he had made man on the earth." — vi, 5. 

Again: — "The earth was corrupted before God, and was filled with ini- 
quity, and when God had seen that the earth was corrupted, for all flesh hao 
corrupted its way upon the earth, he said to Noe, * The end of all flesh ia 
come before me ; the earth is filled with iniquity through them, and I will 
destroy them with the earth.' " — 11, 12, 13, and 14 verses. 

My opponent cannot say that they received absolution ; they 
despised Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and were over- 
whelmed in the flood, the guilt of mortal sin being fixed upon 
their heads. 

Mr. Maguire says, Christ went and released those people out 
of prison. Look to the text. Did we even suppose that the 
passage referred to purgatory; it is merely said, that He preached 
to the spirits, but there is no mention whatsoever made of theif 
having been delivered. My view of the passage is this : Christ 
was raised from the dead by the power of the Holy Ghost, in 
which spirit he preached to the Antediluvians ; to the spiriti 
Bv q)ohxxL " in prison ;" (not which were in prison, as the Douay 
Bible renders the expression,) either in the spiritual prison ot 
ungodliness, when Noah preached, or else in the prison of hell, 
when Peter wrote. Christ, through the instrumentality of Noah, 
preached before the flood. The Holy S])irit, though not so 
abundantly vouchsafed till the Christian dispensation, was always 
with the church of God. The view of the passage entertained bi 
an authority which Mr. Maguire res')ects, coincides with mw*« 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 117 

f he ^ enerable Bede, who lived more than one thousand years 
Ago, gives us the opinion of an early Father, perhaps Athanasius, 
jn this portion of scripture. 

*'He who in our times, coming in the flesh, preached the way of life to the 
world, even He himself also came before the flood, and preached to them whc 
were then unbelieving, and lived carnally ; for even he, by his Holy Spirit, 
was in Noah, and in the rest of the holy men which were at that time, auu 
by their good conversation preached to the wicked men of that age, that they 
might be converted to better manners." — Ful. in Loco. sec. ii, p. 806. 

My friend refers to the second of Maccabees twelfth chapter. 
I have already shown that this book is not canonical. I shall 
again refer to the fourteenth chapter, 41st and 42d, verse in which 
it will be seen, that suicide is commended. 

" Now, as the multitude sought to rush into the house, and to break open 
the door, and set fire to it, when he was ready to be taken, he struck himself 
with his sword, choosing to die nobly, rather than to fall into the hands of the 
wicked." 

Is the eulogy of such conduct in consistency with the spirit 
and precepts of the word of God? Consult another of the 
Apocryphal books, and you will find one Apocryphal book con- 
tradicting another. In the third chapter of Wisdom 1st to 4th 
verses, we read, — 

" But the souls of the just are in the hands of God, and the torment of death 
shall not touch them ; and their departure was taken for misery, and their 
going away from us for utter destruction ; but they die in peace. And though 
til the sight of men they suffered torments, their hope is full of immortality." 

Would the writer of the book of Wisdom have intimated, that 
their death wa,s falsely taken for misery, if they must first pass 
through the torments of a purgatory 1 Would he have said, that 
they are in peace ? Here is W isdom against the second book of 
JV[accabees. I would ask, did the individuals mentioned in the 
twelfth of Maccabees, for whom prayers were made, die in 
mortal sin ? I hope that my friend allows, that idolatry is a 
mortal sin ; they were guilty of it. 

" They found under the coats of the slain, some of the donaries of the idols 
of Jamnia, which the law forbiddeth to the Jews, so that all plainly saw, thai 
for this cause they were slain." — 40. 

Thus, regarding the Apocrypha, merely as an historical rela 
lion, and meeting my learned antagonist on this ground, as the) 
contain palpable contradictions, why should they be made the 
foundation for even an historical truth. I must, however, advert 
lo other matters. I am ready to prove the genuineness, authen- 
ticity, and canonicity of the scriptures, if the question be pro- 
posed to me in a manner becoming a scholar; but I have been 
shut up, as is evident, to an extreme case, that of the pooi 
ignorant peasants My friend has quoted lai^t^it^ from tiM 



118 THE DOCTRINE OF I URGATORY. 

Fathers. I beg to remark, that M. Trevern, lately promoted 
from the bishopric of x\ire to that of Strasburgh, (I need noi 
add, a Roman Catholijc divine) honestly admits, that Jesua 
Christ has communicated no revelation to us concerning purga- 
tory, and observer — 

" Flad it been necessary for us to be instructed in such questions, JesuF 
wouH doubtless reveal the knowledge of them ; he has not done so ; wi 
nan, therefore, only form conjectures on the subject, more or less probable." — 
Discuss. Amic. Vol. ii, p. 242. 

The celebrated Roman Catholic Bishop Fisher inform us, 
that — 

"In the ancient Fathers, there is either none at all, or very rare mention 
cf a purgatory : that by the Grecians it is not believed to this day: that the 
Latins, not all at once, but by little and httle, received it, "pedetentim," step 
by step ; and that purgatory being so lately known, it is not to be marvelled 
that in the first times of the church there was no use of Indulgences, seeing 
these had their beginning, offer that men for a while had been affrighted with 
the torments of purgatory.'"'' — Roffens Assert. Lutheran Confutat. Artie. 18. 

Cardinal Cajetan observes — 

"If we could have any cc-tairty concerning the ongin of indulgences, 'i( 
would help us much in the disquisition of the truth of purgatory; but Wh 

HAVE NOT BY WRITING ANY AUTHORITY, EITHER OF THE HOLY SCRIPTUREt, 
OR ANCIENT DOCTORS, GREEK OR LATIN, WHICH AFFORDS US ANY KNOWLEl Gg 

THEREOF." — Cap. 2, de Indulg. 

And Alphonsus de Castro writes, 

" jyfant/ things are known to us, of which the ancients were altogether ig iv> 
rant, as purgatory, indulgences,'''' ^c, — Adv. Hoeor. L. 12, Tit. Purg. f. 25 »j. 

We have Cyprian, Tertullian, and various other quotatioAw 
from the Fathers, overturning those which have been adduc-ed 
by my friend, did time permit me to repeat them. But I woiila 
briefly ask, why did Polycarp specially treat on the resurrecti oit 
of the dead, and yet wholly omit the doctrine of purgator/ t 
(Epist. ad Philip. § 11, v, ii.) Why did Ignatius assert, that 
only two states in the future world, a state of death, and a staie 
of life, are set before us ; so that every one who dies, goes to 
his own proper place ; and why did he not make the slightest 
allusion to a purgatory, if he believed in it ?- — (Ep. ad Magnes. 
§ V.) Why did Athenagaras write a treatise on the Resurrect 
(ion of the Dead, and yet make no mention of purgatory ?-— De 
Resurr. Mort. in Oper. pp. 143 — 219. Cyprian says^ — 

"When once we have departed hence, there is no longer any place foi 
repentance — no longer any effectiveness of satisfaction. Here life is either losi 
or held ; here we may provide for our eternal salvation by the worship of God 
and the fruitfulness of faith. Let not any one be retarded, ei*'^er by sins of 
by length of years, from attaining to salvation. * 4 * * ♦ 

To him who believes, a salutary indulgence is granted from tho Divine pity ; 
und immediately afti-^ deeih he passes to a blessed immortality.^' •^^ypriiin ad 
Demetrianj (k 193. 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. lit 

Tcrtullian counts it injurious to Christ to hold Ibat such as 
ire called home by him, are in a state to he piled. He says, — 

"We wrono; Christ, when we do not with equanimity hear of those who are 
numraoned hence by him, as if they were to be pitied." — Lib. de Patient, c. 9. 

Mr. Maguire. — You will easily perceive, gentlemen, thai 
this is an important discussion. My adversary has endeavoured 
to explain away some of the texts — I shall only remark, thai 
with regard to these texts, he may have his private judgment, 
and I have mine. There are two or three which we never shall 
givt? up — in respect to the others, we shall not relinquish the 
doctrine of the church for the first ages, and adopt the opinion 
of Mr. Pope. He says, that a man will be detained in purga- 
tory for one thousand years — that is not the doctrine of the 
Catholic church, and I never said it was — it is absurd in this 
manner to meet direct arguments by unfounded suppositions. 
The church has pronounced no decision as to the length of time 
that souls may be detained in purgatory. If a soul remain there 
but for two minutes, the doctrine is as fully established, as if is 
remained there foi two thousand years. My arguments are 
founded upon scripture and reason, and upon the authority 0[ 
the universal church. 

Mr. Pope has asserted, that a Roman Catholic, in making an 
act of faith, builds it upon private judgment. — The Catholic has 
only to exercise his private judgment upon the scriptural proofs 
of the authority of the church. That once established, the 
Catholic is enabled to make an act of faith upon Divine authority 
— the Protestant never can make an act of faith until he clears 
up all the sophistries and cavillings of the deists. The Catholic 
once admitting the authority of the church, rests satisfied — he 
laughs to scorn the objections of the infidel, and founds his faith 
upon the immoveable word of Christ. We exercise our private 
judgment to ascertain the authority of the church. But the 
moment we have that fact satisfactorily established, all our doubts 
and difficulties vanish. Mr. Pope then, all this while ha? '>een 
building castles in the air, and conjuring up the phantoms of his 
own imagination, for the mere purpose of laying them again. 
Similar arguments, to those which he has advanced, were urged 
by Porphyry, and Julian the apostate — by Rousseau, Diderot, 
and Voltaire, who set their own private judgments against the 
authority of the Catholic church, and some of whom, cm their 
death-beds, sought to be reconciled to her communion. Mr. 
Pope has enlarged upon the wonderful blessing of being justified 
through the merits of Christ. I trust, that I am a Christian from 
conviction, and although the profession of it is not as frequently 
w> my lips as on those of others, I hope to be justified througk 



120 THE DOCTUINE OF PURGATORY. 

the merits of Christ. I allow no merits but his. He is tbf 
source aud fountain of all merit. That is the doctrine of the 
Catholic Chuich, and it is a point of our doctrine, regarding 
which Protestants are much misinformed. We do adnJi^ that 
the saints can beseech Christ, and interfere by their prayers in 
our behalf — but we deny that they have any merits of their own 
— they have none, except through the Redeemer. Jesus Christ—- 
he is the Divinity — the spring — the source whence every thing 
must come. It was through his infinite merits he saved the world. 
Does Mr. Pope, in the hearing of bishops, dare to stay the 
arm of divine and omnipotent mercy, in his explanation of the 
sin against the Holy Ghost? Are we not told, that whoever 
invokes the name of the Lord shall be saved? Is it impossible 
that a man who has committed the sin against the Holy Ghost, 
who has denied the known truth, may not, after the revolution of 
sixty years, suppose, repent sincerely of his sins, obtain the par- 
don of a merciful God, and be saved ? Shall it be said, that the 
gates of heaven would be closed against a truly repentant sinner? 
Tertullian was condemned for asserting, that the church had not 
the power to absolve from the sin of apostacy, and from the sin 
against the Holy Ghost, lertullian was excluded from the 
Catholic church in the second century, because he promulgated 
such a doctrine. Mr. Pope says, that by paying the last far- 
thing, is meant paying in this world. 

[Mr. Pope.— What I stated was, that if sins be forgiven in 
purgatory, the uttermost farthing cannot be paid there — if the 
uttermost farthing hepaid^ sins cannot he forgiven in purgatory.] 

Mr, Maguire. — You evidently say that the payment of the 
uttermost farthing is confined to this world. By what right can 
you deny that it may not also be paid in purgatory ? If it be 
paid in purgatory, then sins are forgiven there. If it be paid m 
this world, then souls go direct to heaven, which I never denied 
The necessity of purgatory to ail, forms no portion of the beliel 
of the Catholic church. Thousands may go to heaven without 
going through purgatory. But if a man should die in venial sin, 
God is too merciful to consign his soul to eternal damnation^ 
He will purify him, and take him to himself. God, in his mercy 
•viil listen to the prayers of the faithful on earth, for those who 
are placed in such circumstances. The Catholic church, there- 
fore, receives the article of the communion of saints. I sh«ll 
not attempt to force it upon Protestants — but let them look ic 
tnd examine it in the creed. 

My learned friend, Mr, Pope, has frequently referred to th« 
merits of Christ's blood. IVo one is more readv to plead th» 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORT 121 

efbcacv of the Redeemer's blood than I am ; but instead of 
introducing its glorious merits every moment in a public discus- 
sion, I reserve it for more solemn occasions. When I behold 
a sinner afraid to pray, I draw his attention to the infinite mercy 
of God ; and when the unfortunate man, overwhelmed with the 
weight of his sins, is on the point of sinking into despair, I 
awaken his hopes, and arouse him to a sense of his duty, by 
pointing to the blood of the Lamb, shed for the redemption of 
man. Mr. Pope says, that the fire mentioned in scripture is 
merely probationary. I am at a loss to know in that case what 
our Divine Lord meant by casting into prison until the 'Uttermost 
farthing should be paid, which had not been remitted *' while in 
the way,'- that is, in this life, but which should be discharged 
" in the prison," that is, in the next life. A confusion of ideas 
seemed to pervade the mind of my friend while addressing him- 
self to this point. To the man who sincerely seeks the truth, 
the grace of God is given to guide and to direct him. But the 
influence of grace would not have led my friend into the 
erroneous interpretation which he endeavoured to affix to this 
passage of the scriptures. 

Mr. Pope has stated correctly the doctrine of the Catholic 
church, with respect to the persons who go to purgatory. 
The doctrine of the Cathohc church is this : — A man who has 
committed sin, but who has received absolution — whose heart is 
penetrated with a sincere contrition for his sins — who has firmly 
determined never more to offend, and is resolved to make resti- 
tution to God and to his neighbor, — such a man may go to 
heaven directly after his death. But those who have altogether 
wasted their time here — who have neglected to perform the 

-ecessary duties in the way of co-operation for the pardon which 
tney have obtained through the merits of Christ — must be purified 
in a third place before they can enter the kingdom of heaven. 
Mr. Pope has said, that Christ preached to those who were in 
prison, but did not release them. I have heard the assertion 
with astonishment. Surely, if Christ went to preach, he would 
not los^ the effect of his mission. Christ went to announce to 
the spirits in prison the glad tidings of redemption, to make 
known to them his victory over sin and death, and to bring them 
with him to that paradise which he had promised to the thief 
upon the cross. Where Christ is, there is paradise. The prison 
was paradise while Christ was there. With regard to the private 
opinions of theologians, which Mr. Pope has cited as making 
against purgatory — even if they did so, (and I trust his quota- 
tions are not unfairly taken) I shall merely say, that I am now 
stating the doctrine of the Catholic church. Mr. Pope haa 
quoted the book of Wisdom, as if it contradicted the book of 

11 



1S2 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORI 

Maccabees. I shall just read to you the entire p.issage refen^d 
o, and you will judge whether it is at all contradictory to the 
book of Maccabees : 

"But the souls of the just are in the hand of God, and the torment of death 
ehall not touch them. In the sight of the unwise they seemed to die, and 
their departure was taken for misery, and their going away for utter destruc- 
tion ; but they are in peace. And though in the sight of men they suffered 
torments, their hope is full of immortality."— iii, I — 4. 

Here the book of Wisdom merely states that the souls of he 
just go to glory — and so they shall. Does that contradict the 
doctrine of purgatory ? Thousands may go to heaven without 
going to purgatory — and those who go there, are only on their 
passage to salvation — so there is here no contradiction whatever. 

Mr. Pope has quoted a passage from the 2d book of Macca- 
bees, as if it sanctioned murder. It merely eulogizes the soldiers 
who died bravely in the defence of their country. Is it murder 
the writer recommends, when he praises Judas for fighting 
nobly ? With regard to what Mr. Pope said respecting the 
Idols ; I grant that those who were slain had committed mortal 
sin, but was it impossible for them to make an act of sincere 
contrition before they expired, or in the paroxysms of death, to 
ook to the blood of the long expected Jesus ? Was it not lawful 
on that supposition, for Judas Maccabeus, who was a charitable 
man, to offer up prayers for their repose ? Granting that a 
third place did exist, was his conduct inconsistent with that 
doctrine ? It is quite impossible for Mr. Pope to prove that *he 
book of Maccabees is not canonical. He has quoted Bishop 
Fisher against me ; It would indeed appear extraordinary if 
Bishop Fisher, who died a martyr for the Catholic religion — who 
was put to death by Henry VIII, along with the chancellor, Sii 
Thomas Moore, because he would not deny the Pope's supre- 
macy — should state what was contrary to the universally acknow* 
ledged doctrine of the church. I shall not follow the example 
of Mr. Pope, and volunteer unmanly allusions i? the established 
church of England. I am not leagued with ihose pretended 
friends who conspire her overthrow. I would not conspire to 
destroy even the temporalities of that church. In her spiritual 
and apostolic claims, she com.es nearest to our own. 

Mr. Pope has asked me, why did not Polycarp, who was one 
of the early Fathers, speak of purgatory? This is a curious 
negative argument. I might as well conclude, that because a 
certain historian has not mentioned a certain fact, therefore it 
never occurred — though vouched for by several other credible 
and contemporary narrators. There is no mention made by 
any early historians (the Christian writers excepted) of the 
«iiracl63 of Christ, unless in one passage in Josephus. Thai 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORF. 123 

passage has been exploded by critics as not authentic ; — am 1, 
then, from such premises, to conclude that these miracles never 
were performed ? 

I shall now read to you the passages from the Fathers, .n 
reference to the doctrine which forms the subject of discussion 
Jhis day. 

Pertullian says 
We have oblations for the dead in the anniversary day." 

And to widowers he writes, 

"Reflect for whose soul you pray — for whom you make annual oblations.' 

St. Ephrem of Edessa, in a work entitled his Testament 
ihus proceeds ; 

" My brethren come to me, and prepare me for my departure, for mj 
strength is wholly gone. Go along with me in psalms, and in your prayers j 
and please constantly to make oblations for me (-rrpoacpopag.) When the 
thirtieth day shall be completed then remember me; for the dead are 
HELPED BY THE OFFERINGS OF THE LiviNG. Now listen with patience to 
what I shall mention from the Scriptures. Moses bestowed blessings on 
Reuben after the third generation. — (Deut. xxxiii, 6.) But if the dead ara 
not aided, why was he blessed ? Again, if they be insensible, hear what the 
Apostle says, ' If the dead rise not again at all, why are they then baptized 
for them.' — (1 Cor, xv, 29.) If, also, the sons of Mathias (2d Mace, xii,) 
who celebrated their feasts in figure only, could cleanse those from guilt, by 
their oflTerings who fell in battle, how much more so shall the priests of Christ 
aid the dead by their oblations and prayers." — In Testament, tome iii, p. 
294, Edit. Vossil. p. 371, Edit. Oxonii. 

St. Cyril, of Jerusalem; 

" Then (during sprvice) we pray for the holy Fathers and bishops that are 
dead ; and in short for all those who are departed this life, in our communion^ 
believing that their souls receive very great relief by the prayers that are offer- 
ed for them, while the holy mid tremenduous victim lies upon the altar. Thia 
we will shew you by an example. For I know there are many who sj^y, 
* What good can it do a soul which is departed out of this life, whether with 
sins or without them, to be remembered in this sacrifice?' But tell me, I 
pra\ you, if a king had sent into banishment some persons that had offended 
him, and their friends should present him with a crown of immense price, to 
appease his anger, might not the king on that account, shew some favor to 
the guilty persons? So do we address our prayers to God for those that are 
dead, though they were sinners ; not by presenting to him a crown, but by 
offering up to him Christ, who was sacrificed for our sins, that so he, who ia 
BO merciful and good, may become gracious to them as well as to us." — Mysti- 
gog. Cat. pp. 297, 298. 

The fourth council of Carthage, canon 79, tome ii, p. 12C6. 
Also, the 29th canon of the preceding council of Carthage, ibi- 
dem, p. 1171 : 

"Penitents who have carefully submitter! eo the laws of the heads of the 
church, should they accidentally die on the road, oi by sea, where no asuis- 
tance could be given, should he remembered in the prayers and offenngs of thi 
faithful:' 

St. Gregory of \ysa, (Orat. pro defunctis. T. ii, p. 1066 
7, 8.) says — 



121 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

"In order that a man might be left to the dignity of free will, and evil at 
the same tiine be taken from him, Divine will thus devised : He allows him ta 
remain subject to what himself haschosen, that having tasted of the evil which 
he desired, and learned by experience how bad an exchange has been made, 
he might again feel an ardent wish to lay down the load of those vices and 
moinations which are contrary to reason; and thus, in this liie being renova- 
ted by prayers and the pursuit of wisdom, or in the next being expiated by 
the purging fire, he might recover the state of happiness which he had lost. 
Man, otherwise, must inchne to that side to which his passions tend. But 
when he has quitted his body, and the difference between virtue and vice ib 
known, he cannot be admitted to approach the Divinity till the purging fire 
snail have expiated the stains with wuich his soul was infected. That same 
fire in others will cancel the corruption of matter and the propensity to evil." 

St. Ambrose having, in the preceding part of the chapter, 
spoken of the effect of penal fire on what the Apostle calls silver 
and gold, and hay and stubble, thus concludes : 

" * We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one 
may recei/e the proper things of the body, according as he hath done, whether 
it be good, or whether it be evil.' — (2 Cor. v. 10.) Take care that you carry 
not with you t« the judgment of God, either wood or stubble which the fire may 
consume. Take care lest, having one of the things that may be approvedi, 
you at the same time have much that may give offence. 'If any man's works 
burn he shall suffer loss ; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.' 
^1 Cor. iii. 15.) Whence it may be collected, that the same man is saved in 
pj\rt, and condemned in part, (salvatur ex parte^ et condemnatur ex parte.) 
C^ncious, therefore, that there are many judgments, let us examine all our 
Actions. In a man that is just loss is suffered ; grievous is the burning of the 
•a me work : in the wicked man, wretched is the punishment." — Sermon 9.0, 
oi K Psalm cxviii, t. 2. 

And in his comnnent on the first epistle to the Corinthians — 

* *If any man's work burn, he shall suffer loss.' False doctrine, which 
4bill perish, is the work that is said to burn, for all bad things must perish. 
t ',» suffer loss is to suffer pain. And who that is in pain does not suffer loss ? 
HK\i ' he shall be saved, yet so as by fire,' He will be saved, the Apostle tells 
Uhy because his substance shall remain, whilst his bad doctrine shall perish, 
fierefore he said, * yet so as by fire,' — in order that his salvation be not under' 
stood to be icithout pain. He shows that he shall be saved indeed, but that he 
shall undergo the pain of fire, and be thus purified ; not like the unbelieving 
and wicked man, who shall be punished in everlasting fire." 

In Obitu \'alentini — he says, in an apostrophe to the departed 
emperor, 

"Blessed shall you be if my prayers can avail any thing. No day shall 
Dass in which I will not make honorable mention of you ; no night, in which 
you shall not partake of my prayers. In all my oblations I will remembei 
▼ou.'^ 

And for the emperor Theodosius, deceased, having mad*j ^ 
solemn prayer, he thus proceeds : — 

" I loved him, therefore will I follow him to the land of the living. I will 
n^t leave him till by my prayers and lamentations he shall be admitted to thi 
hoiy mount of the Lord, to which his deserts call him. Da requiem perfectam 
servo tuo The4>doMo: '—Gr^nt, O Lord, perfect repose to thy servant Tbe9i 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 125 

Mr. Pope rose. — I shall endeavor rapidly to fellow m) Rever- 
end antagonist through his observations. I shall prove upon his 
own showing, that some souls were confined one thousand years 
in purgatory ; for if those who had been overwhelmed in the 
flood, were in the prison of purgatory when Christ died, he wiU 
admit, that the flood was somewhat more than one thousand yp.ars 
before the death of Christ. (Mr. Maguire here observed, that 
they did not go at all to purgatory.) With respect to exercising 
an act of faith, how can any one exercise it on the authority of 
the church of Rome, without examining the proofs of that autho- 
rity ? The church of Rome, we are informed, builds her autho- 
rity upon historical, that is, human testimony. This is somewhat 
like building castles in the air. My Reverend friend has stated, 
that there are no merits but the merits of Christ. But, what says 
the council of Trent ? 

" If any one shall say, that the good works of a justified person slt^ so the 
gifts of God, that they are not also the the merits of the justified himself; oi 
that the justified person, hythe good works which, through the grace of God 
and the merit of Jesus Christ, of whom he is a living member, are performed 
by him, does not truly deserve an increase of grace, eternal hfe, and the attain- 
ment of eternal life itself, (if he shall depart in grace) and also dn increase ol 
glory, let him be accursed." — (Sess. vi, cap. xvi, can. 32.) 

What does the doctrine of supererogation mean, if there be 
no other merits but the merits of Christ l As to the sin against 
the Holy Ghost, the adorable Saviour (not 1) has said, that it is 
unpardonable ; far be it from me, to limit the mercy of God ; as 
far as my humble efforts reach, I would, if possible, preach the 
gospel to the whole world, publishing free pardon through the 
blood of the Lamb. My friend has asked, v/hetherthe paymeni 
of the uttermost farthing refers to earth, or to a future state. 
The Saviour in St. Matt, is exhorting us to be reconciled on ih( 
way^ that is, in this world. T admit, therefore, at once that " the 
uttermost farthing" refers to the future state ; but I have shown, 
that the passage speaks of everlasting punishment. With respect 
to the 1st of Corinthians and 3d chap. ; I have already proved 
that the fire is probatory not purgatorial^ and that it is to try all ; 
therefore, the Apostle does not speak of purgatory. My friend 
has stated, that the mission of Christ to the spirits in prison, 
could not have been ineffectual. I take him upon his own ground ; 
I ask, did not Christ often preach, without any fruit resulting 
from his labours ? How few were accually conveited by the per- 
sonal ministry of Christ. The death of Christ was retrospective 
as well as prospective. Abraham rejoiced to see his day. Many 
through the vista of distant ages, beheld the rising of the star oj 
Jacob, by faith discerned the manifestation of the Son of God, 
about to offer an atonement for the sins of a ruined world. My 
friend has said, ^uere Christ js, there is paradise. Did Christ, 

11* 



126 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

in answer to the prayer of the penitent thief say, " Yes, I wil 
remember thee ; I will go to purgatory for a few moments, but 
shall leave thee there, to purge away thy sins.'' 'Tis true, where 
Christ is, there is happiness, but in heaven happiness supreme ' 
there the Redeemer shines forth in all the effulgence of his per 
sonal glories. I have shown that the book of Wisdum is against 
the second book of Maccabees. He says, that the writer of 
Maccabees commended bravery — " He struck himself with his 
sword," is the expression — I ask, was this dying nobly ? The 
commendation is not that of bravery, but of suicide. (Mr. Ma* 
guire here requested Mr. Pope to read the passage. Mr. Pope 
comphed) : 

" Now as the multitude sought to rush into his house, and to break open 
the door, and to set fire to it, when he was ready to be taken, he struck him 
self with his svvord, choosing rather to die nobly,^^ &c, &c. 

My friend has said, that the idolaters might have repented 
before they died, I answer, had they repented, they would have 
thrown their idols to the moles and to the bats : but we read, 
that they were found under their garments. — (2 Mace, xii, 40.) 
My opponent has said, that Bishop Fisher was a martyr. This 
circumstance, I should have thought, would have given greater 
weight to Bishop Fisher's authority, concerning the novelty of 
purgatory. 

My adversary has objected to the negative proofs from Poly- 
carp and others, as if I brought forward no direct testimony. 
Hear St. Clement Romanus : — 

" When once we shall have departed this life, there is no room for us in 
another, either to confess, or to repent." — Ep. ad. Cor. xi, § 8. 

Cyprian : — 

" The end of the temporal life being accomplished, we are divided into the 
habitations, either of everlasting death or immortality." — Ad Demetrian. 
Bee. 16 

The autaor of the Questions and Answers, attributed to Justin 
Martyr, writes thus : — 

" After the departure of the soul out of the body, there is presently made 
a distinction betwixt the just and the unjust : for they are brou^^ht by the 
angels to places fit for them : the souls of the righteous to paradise, where 
they have the commerce and sight of angels and archangels : the souls of the 
unj'^t to the places in hell."— Resp. ad Orthodox. Gtuaest. 75. 

Athanasius says — 

*' That is not death that befalleth the righteous, but a translation : for they 
are translated out of this world into everla.«ri,ig rest : and as a man would go 
Dut of a prison, so do the saints go out of this troublesome Hfe, unto those 
good things that are prepared for them." — De Virgin. 

Macarius saith — 
^ When the holy servants of God remove out of their body, the choniP ol 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 127 

tngels receive their souls into their own side into the purer world, and so bring 
ihem unto ttie Lord." — CEgypt, Horn. 22. 

Again — " The Lord beholding thy mind that thou fightest and lovest him 
with thy whole soul, separates death from thy soul in one hour, for this is not 
hard for him to do ; for he taketh thee away m the minute of an hour, and 
taketh thee into his own bosom and unto light, for he plucketh thee awa}' 
from the mouth of darkness, and presently translates thee into his own king- 
dom ; for God can easily do all these things in a minute of an hour— this 
provided only that thou bearest love unto him." — Hom. 36. 

I need not referr to other quotations. Some of the passaged 
which my opponent has cited, permit me to say, merely speak of 
oblations for the dead. At an early period in the history of the 
church, thanksgivings were offered for those who had departed 
this life in the faith and patience of Jesus Christ. I have followed 
my friend through some of his ramblings. lie talks of sophistry 
and quibbling, and expresses his wish to come to strong argu- 
ments. I would also like to come to strong argument. You 
will decide whether the proofs of my opponent are fitted to sup- 
port the quaking foundation on which he stands. I shall now 
first refer to presumptive arguments against purgatory. It is not 
probable that a doctrine which makes so wide a distinction 
between the rich and the poor, should have come from that God 
who is no respecter of persons, and who has chosen the poor 
rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom. This doctrine also savors 
of inhumanity. I would assist, as far as my ability would enable 
me, my humblest neighbour, in rescuing from destruction his ox 
or his ass ; but what shall we say of a system, which, believing 
that masses can assist souls suffering in purgatory, refuses to 
offer them, until the ready cash is paid down ! Again 
the doctrine of purgatory, viewed in the light of holy scripture, 
is inconsistent with the revealed will of God. St. Paul asks — 

*' He that spared not his own son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall 
Ke not with him also freely give his people all things ? — Rom. viii, 32. 

"As the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward thei 
Uiat fear him." 

" He knoweth our frame, he remembereth that we are but dust : like as 
father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him : the mercy 
of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him^ a id 
nis righteousness unto children's children." — Ps. ciii, 11, 13, 14, 17a 

Judgment he calls " his strange work ;" " He does not will 
ugly afflict the children of men ;" (Lament, iii, 33,) and, if liis 
peopb are called to taste the cup of sorrow, he sweetens it with 
many a consoling ingredient by the word of God, and teaching 
of his spirit. God loves his people with an eternal and unchang- 
ing affection. And can I suppose, that He who for their sakes 
spared not his co-equal and co-eternal Son, will consign them 
to a place of suffering, when they shall have passed through the 
tniseriet^ of this sinful world 1 Again this doctrine is derogatory 



128 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

k> the sacrifice of Christ. If it be a fact, that the one oblatior. 
on the cross is all-sufficient ; if the promise of the nt w cove- 
nant runs thus, " thy sins and thine iniquities will I remember 
no more," " the blood of Christ cleanseth from all sin ;" if i1 
be a truth that God " will not give his glory to another," does 
not the doctrine of purgatory derogate from the sacrifice of Cal- 
vary ? Hear the council of Trent — 

" If any shall say, that after the grace of justification has been receive^ 
the offence is so remitted to the penitent sinner, and the guilt of eternal pun 
ishment so effaced, that there remains no guilt of temporal punishment to b« 
saffered either in this world, or in the world to come in purgatory, befort 
admission can be obtained to the kingdom of heaven ; let him be accursed.* 
Sess. vi, cap. xvi, can. 30. 

Oh, my friends, what blasphemy is such language against thai 
Redeemer who bowed the heavrns and came down amongst us — 
who lifted off the curse of heaven's violated law, and redeemed 
the immortal soul by his own blood ! — David says, 

" As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our iniquities 
from us : who forgiveth all thy iniquities : who healeth all thy diseases." — 
Ps. cii, 12, 13. 

In Isaiah we read, 

"I am, I am he, that blot out thy iniquities for my own sake, and I wi^l 
not remember thy sins." — xliii, 25. 

"I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more." 
Jer. xxxi, 34. 

"Thou shalt sprinkle me with hyssop, and t shall be cleansed: thou shah 
wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow." — Ps. i, ix. 

" If your sins be as scarlet, they shall be made white as snow : and if they 
be red as crimson, they shall be white as wool." — Isaiah i, 18. 

An(^ yet the believer, according to the church of Rome, 
requires fire to make his sins whiter than snow ! 
Do I not read, Isaiah xxxviii, 17, 

"But thou hast delivered my soul that it should not perish: thou hast cast 
a// my sins behind thy back." 

Do I not read, John i, 29, 

"Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who taketh away the sini of thi 

world." 

And again, 1 John i, 7, 

'* The blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanseth us from all sin." 

And at the 9th verse, 

" If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sms, and 
to cleanse us from all iniquity." 

In Colossians we read 

•* You, when )^ou were dead in your sins, and the uncircumcision of yoitf 
tesh, he hath quickened together with him ; forgiving you all offences."-— ii 14 

What gftys the prophet Micah, vii^ 19. 



THE iJOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 129 

• He will turn again, and have mercy on us : he will put away our iniqui 

^es ; and he will cast all our sins into the bottom of the sesu" 

We read that, 

" Other foundation can no man lay save that which has been laid, which il 
Christ Jesus." — 1 Cor. iii, 11. 

The Apostle Paul speaks of confidence — 

" Their sins and iniquities will I remember no more ; now where remission 
of these is, there is no more an offering for sin." 

" Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood 
.:>f Jesus, by a new and living way which he hath consecrated for us through 
the vail, that is to say, his flesh, and having an high priest over the house of 
God, let us draw near with a true heart, in full assurance of faith, having our 
hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience." — Heb. x, 19, 22. 

Mr. Maguire would be justified in censuring confidence, if 
the believer placed his dependance on his own works for salva- 
tion : but confidence is warranted, when exclusively built upon 
the foundation laid in Zion, the obedience unto death of the 
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. St. Paul says — 

'* God commendeth his charity towards us, because when as yet v/e were 
sinners, according to the time, Christ died for us ; much more therefore, being 
now justified by his blood, shall we be saved from wrath through him ; for if 
when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, 
much more being reconciled shall we be saved through his* Hfe." — Rom. 
V, 8, 10. 

What is the meaning of the Apostle's argument ? 

** If when we were enemies we were reconciled to God, by the death of his 
Son, much more, after we have been reconciled shall we he saved by iiS life.'' 

I would argue, that if, when w^e were enemies^ God reconcile^^ 
us to himself, surely he will not consign the sinner to such a placo. 
of torment as purgatory, after he has become his adopted child, 

" There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus," (says Si. 
Paul, Rom. viii, 1.) 

** Amen, Amen, I say unto you, he who heareth my word, and beiieveth 
him that sent me, hath life everlasting, and cometh not into judgment, but is 
passed from death to life, — John, v, 24. 

I say, if there be no condemnation to them that are in Christ 
Jesus, surely the Deity, who is infinite in justice, would not 
consign the believer, against whom there is no condemnation-, 
to the tortures of purgatory. St. Paul writes, 

" Whc shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect ? It is God that justi- 
iietii. Who is he that condemneth ? It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that 
i 3 risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh inter- 
cession for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ ? Shall tribu- 
lation or distress, or persecuXion, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or 
gword : as it written, for thy sake we are killed all the day long, we ar€ 
accounted as sheep for the slaughter ; nay, in all these things we are more 
than conquerors, through him that hath loved us. For I am persuaded, that 
neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor thingi 
yre^ent, nw tilings to com^, nor heighc, nor depth, nor an/ other creature^ 



130 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

shall be a hie to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesiw oui 
Lord.— Rom. viii, 33, 39. 

The Douay version of the commencement of the passage 
which I have read, is absurd. To the question, " Who shall ac- 
cuse against the elect of God ?" the Douay Bible replies, " God 
that justifieth :" as if the God who justifies, was the accuser of 
his elect. And again, to the question, " Who is he that shall con- 
demn?" The Douay translation answers, " Christ Jesus that 
died :" as if the Saviour condemned his people. By the way, 
I may mention, that Griesbach beautifully elucidates the pas- 
sage, by placing a nriark of interrogation after the expression 
" God that justifieth," and at the end of the 34th verse : the 
meaning of the passage will then be — who shall lay any thiRg 
to the charge of God's elect? Shall the God who justifies them, 
lay any thing to their charge ? Who is he that shall condemn ? 
Shall Christ condemn, who died, and having been exalted to the 
right hand of the everlasting throne intercedes for his people ? 
I say with Paul, " If God be for his people, who shall be against 
them ?" If God acquits them, shall the church of Rome condemn 
theni to purgatory? 

I shall fill up the few minutes that remain, by reading to you 
quotations from several Roman catholic writers^ which clearly 
show, that during the dark ages the state of things was such, 
that opinions the most monstrous could with facility have been 
introduced. 

A bishop of the church, in year 900, thus complains: 

"So great folly now oppresseth the miserable world, that at this day more 
ibsurd things are believed by Christians than ever any could impose upon 
*i«j blind pagans." — Agoberd. Epis. Lug. Lib. de Grandi, &c. 

Sabellius saith, 

" It is wonderful to observe, what a strange forgetfulness of all arts dio 
ajout this time seize upon men, insomuch that neither the Popes nor other 
orinces seemed to have any sense or apprehension of any thing that might be 
useful to human life. There were no wholesome laws, no reparations of 
churches, no pursuit of liberal arts ; but a kind of stupidity, and madness, 
and forgetfulness of manners had possessed the minds of men." 

And a little after, — *'I cannot," says he " but much wonder from whence 
these tragical examples of the Popes should spring, and how their minda 
should come to be so devoid of all piety, as neither to regard the person which 
thsy sustained, nor the place they were in. — Enead. 9, Lib. i, 900, 

PhiL Burgomansis says — 

" It happened in that age, through the slothfulness of men, that there was a 
general decay of virtue, both in the head and in the members." — (Ann. 906.) 

I wonder who the Head was ? And again, 

^* These times, through the ambition and cruel tyranny of the Popes, wera 
extremely unhappy ; for the Popes setting aside the fear of God and his wor- 
ship, fell into such enmities among themselves, as cruel tyrants exerciai 
towards one another." — (Ann. 908.) 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGAlORY. 131 

And Platma, their own writer, in his History of the Popes, 
^ives the following account of their barbarities to their prede- 
cessors, though many years' deceased. 

"These Popes minded nothing else but how they might extinguish b j K 
the name and dignity of their predecessors." 

Sigonius, speaking of these times, about the commencement 
of the 10th century, calls them — 

"The foulest and blackest, both in respect to the wickedness of the prin^eg 
•"id madness of the people, that are to be found in all antiquity." — De Regn. 
Ital. Lib. 6. 

Genebrard, speaking of the same time, observes, 

"This is called the unhappy age, bemg destitute of men eminent for wit 
and learning; as also of famous princes and Popes. In this time there was 
scarce any thing done worthy to be remembered by posterity." — Chron. Lib. 4, 

Gerbert, about the beginning of the eleventh century, gives 
this brief character of the Roman Church, in his Epist. 40, 

" The world stands amazed at the manners of Rome." 

Werner gives this character of these times in these words : 

" About the year of our Lord one thousand, there began an effeminate time, 
m which the Christian faith began to degenerate exceedingly, and to dechne 
from its ancient vigour ; insomuch, that in many countries of Christendom, 
neitiier sacraments, nor ecclesiastical rites were observed ; and people were 
given to soothsaying, and withcrafts ; and the priest was like the people." — 
Fac Temporum. 

Strong indeed is the complaint of a great prelate. He says — 

"In the west, and almost all the world over, especially among those who 
are called the faithful, faith failed, and there was no fear of God am.ongthem. 
Justice was perished from among men, and violence prevailing against equity, 
<roverned the nations. Fraud, deceit and the acts of cozenage were grown 
niversal. All kind of virtue gave way as an useless thing and wickedness 
bupplied its place. The world seemed to be declining apace towards its even- 
ing, and the second coming of the Son of Man to draw near: for love was 
^rown cold, and faith was not found on earth. All things were in confusion, 
and the world looked as if it would return again to its old chaos. All sorts 
+ * + + *** were committed with the same freedom as if they had 
been lawful actions ; for men neither blushed at them, nor were punished 
foi them. Nor did the clergy hve better than the people ; for the bishops 
were negligent of the duty of their place, &c, &c. In a word, men run them- 
selves headlong into all vice, and all flesh had corrupted its way." — Bell. 
Sacr. Lib. 1, cap. 18. 

Such was the state of things in the dark ages, when princes 
bowed their knee to the Pope — did any improvement afterwards 
takes place ? 

St. Bernard in the thirteenth century, complain thus, 

"We cannot now say, as is the people, so is the priest; for the people ar« 
not so bad as the priests." — In Con v. S. Pauli. Ser. 1. 

And again, "The bishops to whom the church of God is now committed, 
ftre not teachers but seducers, not pastoris but impostors, not prelates bvd 
Pilates." 



132 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

Mr. Maguire — I agree probably with Mr. P< pe in a grevst 
portion of what he has quoted from Scripture. When Mr. Pope 
talks of a detention for one thousand years in purgatory* and 
speaks of those who were overwhelmed by the deluge, I have 
only to say, that as they died in mortal sin, they could not there- 
fore get admissior even to purgatory. The patriarchs departed 
in peace with God, but I affirm that they were detained in prison 
until our Saviour came to them after his death, to announce the 
glorious tidings of salvation. For no man could enter heaven 
unless through the infinite merits of Christ crucified. The patri- 
archs remained in a third place until released by Christ. This 
is a point of Catholic doctrine. The onus lies on Mr. Pope to 
show that that third place has ceased to exist. 

As to the text quoted relative to the sin against the Holy Ghost. 
St. Augustine, St. Cyprian, and a variety of more recent com- 
mentators, declare that it is to be understood, hke the text con- 
cerning the rich man, not of an absolute impossibility, but of 
great, perhaps extreme difficulty; that is, the grace of repentance 
must come from the Holy Ghost. Now he who attributes the 
work of the Holy Ghost to the Devil, cannot receive such grace, 
therefore his salvation must be a matter of great, of rare diffi 
eulty — since his repentance depends upon the spirit he blas- 
phemes. But if the heart of the man who has even committed 
such a sin shall, in the course of time, become thoroughly 
changed — if he shall sincerely and heartily repent, will Mr. Pope 
say that our Saviour will not extend forgiveness to that man ? 
That is the opinion of some Protestant Divines ; but it never 
shall be mine. I said that there was no pain where Christ was 
My friend retorted, and affirmed that wherever Christ was pro* 
sent, there were heaven and happiness. He concluded this 
portion of his argment with an appeal to the feelings of the meet- 
ing. I shall make no effi)rts to excite your feelings or to bring 
into play /our prejudices and passions. My only appeal shall 
be to direct and positive arguments. 

Mr. Pope referred to what is said of Nicanor in the book of 
Maccabees, in order to prove that that book was not canonical 
or inspired. Do we not read in the book of Judges that Jepthe, 
who is there recorded as the ruler of the people of Goland — who 
IS spoken of as a valiant man, slew his own daughter, in pursu- 
ance of a vow made to God. Are we, therefore, to reject a^ 
uncanonical the book in which this is recorded ? Do we not reac 
of Moses having murdered the Egyptian — of a father having 
children by his own two daughters. Are the books in whicfe 
those facts are re ated to be discarded as uncanonical ? 

Did Mr. Pope quote any passages to prove that the righteous 
must go directly to heaven, v/ithout passing through purgat(»ry 



THE DOCTlirE OF PURGATORT. 133 

[f the just man fall seven times a day, is it derogating from the 
merits of Christ to say, that that man must suffer for a tkne in 
purgatory] Did not our Saviour annex conditions to our obtain 
ing salvation, such as baptism, — without which the atonement on 
the cross cannot be applied to us ? Christ will not redeem us 
unless we are washed in the waters of baptism. Does he any 
where say, that man will be justified by faith only, without baptism? 

With regard to the belief of the Greek church, on the subject 
of purgatory, I have here the translation of Dupi 's Ecclesiasti- 
cal History, by a Protestant, and from it I shall r^ad the follow- 
ing passage : 

**It is evident from some very ancient records of the church, that it was a 
custom among the christians, ub antiquo^ to pray for the souls of the faithful 
departed, in the dreadful mysteries. St. Chrysostom plainly tells us, that it wa» 
decreed by the Apostles. It is certain, that it was in use about two hundred 
years after Christ. This is proved from TertuUian. who thus speaks, 'let tht 
faithful widow pray for the soul of her husband.' This we find practised bj 
many of the most eminent Fathers of the church." 

I have already proved by quotations from TertuUian, St. 
Cyprian, and other most emment Fathers, that during the firsi 
five hundred years of the Christian era, it was the practice of 
the church to pray for the dead. And I have shown in the 
foregoing extract, what is the opinion of the Greek church. 
When Claude, the Huguenot, was engaged in the celebrated 
conference wdth Bossuet, he went to the trouble of writing to 
the Greek church, in order to ascertain their opinions on the 
doctrines of transubstantiation, purgatory, and the invocation of 
saints. A council of the Greek church was assembled, and the 
bishops v/ho attended solemnly decided, that they held the 
doctrine of the real presence of Christ in the sacrament, the 
doctrine of purgatory, and of the invocation of saints. 

With respect to the character of the Cathohc church, the fol- 
lowing passage is taken from the works of the celebrated Dr. 
Jeremy Taylor, whose orthodoxy will not surely be questioned 
by Mr. Pope : 

"There are many considerations in the Catholic church, which may retain 
persons of much reason, and more piety, in its communion. They know it 
to ha'^e been the religion of their foKefathers, which had possession of men's 
understandings before Prctestantism had a name. First, its doctrines had a 
Vong continuance and possession of the church ; which, therefore, cannot be 
easily supposed in the present possessors to be a design, since they have 
receiv».d it from so many ages. Its long presciiption, which is such a preju- 
dice, as cannot wnth many arguments be retrenched, as relying upon these 
grounds, that truth is more ancient than falsehood ; that God would not, for 
so many ages, forsake his church and leave her in error. Then comes the 
splendour and beauty of that church ; its pompous service, the stateUness and 
solemnity of its hierarchy, its name ^Catholic,' the antiqmty ot its doctrmesi^ 
the continual succession of its bishops, and their immediate derivation troni 
the Apostles. Add to tills the multitude and vari ^ty of people which are of 
'Um persuasion, the consent of elder ages, the great consent of one part with 

12 



134 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

anothei contrasted with the great difierences which are commenced among 
their adversanes. To this again add its happiness in being the instrument 
in converting divers nations— the piety and austerity of its rehgious orders— 
the sinole hie of its priests and bishops — tlie severity of its fasts — the great 
reputation of its bishops for faith and sanctity — the known hoUness of sonis 
of its rehgious founders of orders — its miracles — the accidents and casualties 
which have happened to its adversaries, the oblique acts and indirect pro- 
ceedin;:«« of some of those who have departed from it, and above all, the name 
of heretic and schismatic which the Catholic church has fastened on them. 
Proiestants commit themselves by the conduct of the new reformers — at first, 
a few and of the lowest rank of the clergy, being made under ecclesiastical 
ttnsures, assisted against their spiritual superiors by some secular powers, 
when both these and they were subject to that ecclesiastical hierarchy, which 
they opposed." 

The following passage is taken from Sir Edwin Sandys' 
Relation of the Western Religion : — * 

" The Catholic church was founded by the Apostles, with promise, that the 
gates of hell should not prevail against it. It has continued on now, till the 
end of 1600 years, with an honourable line of near two hundred and forty 
Popes, successors of St. Peter, — both tyrants, traitors, pagans, and heretics, 
in vain wrestins;, rasino-, and underminino: it. All the creneral councils, that 
ever were m the world have approved and honoured it. God hath miracu- 
lously blent it from above, so that many doctors have enriched it with their 
writings ; armies of saints have embellished it with their holiness ; martyr* 
with their blood ; virgins with their purity. Even at this day, amid the diffi- 
culties of unjust rebellions, and the unnatural revolts of her nearest children, 
yet she stretcheth out her arms to the utmost corners of the world, newly 
embracing whole nations into her bosom. In all other opposite churches 
there are found inward dissensions and contrariety ; change of opinions, 
uncertainty of resolutions, with robbing of churches, rebelling against gov- 
ernors, and confusion of order. In the Catholic church there is undivided 
unity ; resolutions unalterable ; the most heavenly order, reaching from the 
height of all power to the lowest of all subjection ; all with admirable harmony, 
and undefective correspondence, bending the same way, to the effecting of the 
same work," &c. 

The venerable and learned Earl Fitzwilliam, in his Letters 
^f Atticus, thus speaks of the Catholic church: 

" How I am struck with admiration, when I come to consider the antiquity 
of this venerable Roman church; its vast extent; the majesty, the magnifi- 
cence, the symmetry of its edifice ; its immutable stability amid all the perse- 
cution which it has undergone ; its admirable discipline, which seems traced 
oat by the hand of supernatural wisdom : the impotence of its adversaries, 
notwithsanding all their sophistry, invectives, and calumnies ; when I con- 
template the dignity, the virtue, the talents of its apologists; the vices, the 
dishonesty of its first assailants ; the total extinction of so many sects, 
which have risen up against it ; the little consistency of the present sects ; 
their variations on points of doctrine," &c. 

The ministers of the French reformed churches, in a memorial, 
which they presented to the government, in the 1750, express 
themselves upon this subject, in the following manner : — 

"We do not dissemble, that in the parallel, which we sometimes make 
between your church and ours, the striking features, notwithstanding some 
abuses, are on your side. You certainly existed before we did, since you/ 

*' S«« Note on this passage appended to Mr. Pope^s Second Sx>eech on Fourth Dajr 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 135 

tngm is coeval with that of the Apostles. Whilst, as for us, we have not 
yet existed three centuries: since in 1515, both your ancestors and ouri 
communicated at the same mass: celebrated together the feast of Easter, 
and lived in perfect unanimity of sentiment. Moreover, the chain of tradition, 
whose first hnk was attached by Peter and Paul to the church of Rome, has 
been in such manner preserved amongst you, that, if the Irenoeuses, the 
Grregories, the Athanasiuses, the Chrysostoms, were now agam to return to 
the earth, it would be in the church of Rome alone, that they would find that 
lociety, of which, once, they had been the members.'* 

Il was such considerations as these thai induced Henry the 
Fourth of France, to abandon the Protestant, and embrace ihe 
Catholic religion. — 

" When this illustrious hero, previously to his conversion, was induced to 
study the Catholic religion, he proposed, through the medium of Sully, a 
variety of questions to the Protestant ministers. Amongst others he proposed 
the following: — * Whether it was lawful for him to become a Catholic? 
Their reply vz-as : — ' That it was lawful for him to become a Catholic : seeing, 
that salvation is attainable in the Catholic church.' They added, it is true, 
' Our religion is the more perfect ; but still, the church of Rome is sufficient 
for all the securities of future happiness.' This answer obtained, — the mon- 
arch now consulted the Catholic prelates and theologians respecting the 
security of salvation in the Protestant church. But, he could not find one 
single individual amongst these, that would allow such benefit to exist in tliis 
society. Whence, he reasoned in this manner with the Protestant ministers : 
* You pretend,' he said to them, ' that, by continuing in your communion, my 
religious state is more perfect, than if I were to become a Catholic; whilst, 
at the same time, you own, that I may be saved in the Cathohc church. 
Now, the Catholics, on the contrary, all maintain that salvation is not attain- 
able in your religion ; but that it is confined to the church of Rome. So 
that, by uniting myself to the church of Rome, I may be saved, both according 
to your acknowledgment and theirs. Therefore, 1 should be the maddest of 
men, if, in a business of such infinite importance, I did not take the safest 
side ; consequently^ I decide in favour of the church of Rome, in which, by the 
acknowledgment of all the world, and even of the men who are the rrost 
opposed to each other — my salvation is secure.' " 

Such was the reasoning, and such the decision, of Henry, 
riiey were, alike, the dictates of good sense and prudence. 
The declaration of the Protestant university of Hehnstadt, in 
the case of the Protestant princess of Wolfenbuttle, who was 
destined to be married to the archduke of Austria, is similar to 
!he preceding one of the French reformed ministers, and presents 
the same kind of inference. The members of the above univer- 
sity, in the year 1707, were consulted, 

*' Whether in the consideration of the proposed marriage, the prhictM 
might, in conscience, embrace the Catholic religion ?" 

The answer, dehvered in the form of a declaration, was to 
the following effect : — 

*' First, that the difference between the Protestant and the Catholic reli« 
gions is not fundamental. Secondly, that is therefore lawful to pass from 
tke Protestant to the Catholic cb jrch." 

Mr. Pope, you will be pleased to recollect, drew a frightfii 
picture of this same Catholic church, and described some of tb« 



136 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

Popes m the dark ages as execrable characters. I will ndt. 
deny — indeed, I have already admitted, that ther^ were some 
bad characters among the Popes — but they were few in number. 
Were there not bad she Popes in England? 

Mr. Pope spoke of the dissolute lives of the clergy, but h« 
does not describe more faithfully than does Reeve, in his Eccle- 
siastical History, the dissoluteness and neglect of morals which 
brought on the Reformation. A reformation \^as decidedly re« 
quired, but it was a reformation in morals. Such a reformation 
as the Almighty would bring about, by the instrumentality of good 
and virtuous characters. Mr. Pope quotes a passage from Da- 
vid : " Wash me yet more from my iniquity and cleanse me 
from my sin." Here is the strongest proof that David had been 
already forgiven his sins, and his supplication to the Lord to 
wash him still more^ shows that the temporal punishment of th« 
sin remains after the eternal had been remitted. David adds — 
** For I know my iniquity, and my sin is ahvays before me.'' 
David well knew the effects of sin- -be was aware, that thougk 
the eternal punishment due for his iniquities had, through the 
mercy of God, been remitted, that still he had a further account 
to render, and that a temporal punishment was still to be inflicted. 

Mr. Pope has endeavoured to work upon the feelings of his 
auditory, by continual appeals to the merits of the Redeemer's 
sacrifice. Did I ever deny that the merits of Christ's blood 
washed out all sin 1 But who will deny that a moral martyrdowi 
will render us more acceptable in the eyes of the Redeemer? 
Who will assert, that if Christ grants favours to us, we should 
not labour to render ourselves, in a certain degree, deserving 
of them ] Will not a master be more ready to grant favours to 
a servant, in proportion as that servant becomes entitled to them 
by his good and moral conduct? Though I am not, hke Mr. 
Pope, always dwelling upon the merits of our Redeemer's blood, 
which should never be introduced but with reverence and awe, 
yet I am always ready to assert my faith in their infinite and 
glorious efficacy. Mr. Pope has spoken of the confidence of 
the true believers — I would remind those who possess such con- 
fidence to beware. I would tell them, in the language of scrip- 
ture, to "take heed lest they fall." The inspired writer says. 
»' that no man knovveth whether he be worthy of love or hatred," 
and our Saviour says, " Learn of me, because I am meek and 
humble of heart." If meekness and humility were more pre- 
valent at the present day, this discussion had never taken place. 
I have been upwards of nine years in the mission, and I nevei 
preached a controversial sermon, until I found the Biblicala 
assailing my flock in all quarters — until I saw wolves in sheep'f 
clothing, endeavouring to lead them from their faith, and car 



THE DOCTRINE OF PUKGArORY. 137 

iying on their operations vvith a tract in one hand and the rnone)? 
in the Other — I then found it necessary to stand forward and 
protect the rehgious principles of that flock, over which 1 was 
appointed the spiritual guardian and guide. 

The council of Trent never said, that the merits of the saintj; 
can avail any thing per se. They merely serve others througl 
the hlood of Jesus Christ. Christ is the door through which w€ 
shall enter — He is the vine — we are the branches — and what 
ever good works we may perform, or whatever merits we ma} 
possess, are not to be attributed to us, but to that *divine tre€ 
whence wc spring, and from which we derive our life and nour- 
ishment. Let every pastor take care of his flock — I do not, in 
that respect, invade the rights of others. Mr. Pope n^ay say, 
that he is commissioned to preach to my flock, but I deny the 
fact. I say that he has no ordinary mission to do so, and he 
must prove an extraordinary mission by miracles, as Christ and 
Moses did. If he have an extiaordinary mission, let him giv« 
us such proofs of it, and I am ready to join with him. 

I merely wish en this occasion to employ argument, not 
rhetoric ; and to appeal, not to your prejudices and passions, 
but to the sober reflections of your understandings. If I shall 
be able to remove the prejudices of the honest amongst my 
Protestant countrymen, I shall consider myself as having 
achieved much. 

During the heat of the Reformation, it will be allowed that 
expressions escaped from the exasperated parties on both sides 
which had better been forgotten. We Catholics may appeal to 
the learned and honest Thorndyke, who in his "Just Weights 
and Measures,'' says, 

"The worship of the Host is not idolatry, for the flesh and blood ol Onriat 
is no idol to Christians, wheresoever he is worshipped. He that worships 
the Host believes the Lord Jesus Christ to be the only true God, hyposta- 
tically united to our flesh and blood ; which being present in the Eucharist 
in such manner as he is not present every where, there is due occasion to give 
it that worship in the Eucharist, with which the Godhead in our manhood is 
to be worshipped with upon all occasions. Will any Papist acknowledge 
that he honours the elements of the Eucharist for God ? V/ill common sensr 
charge him with honouring that in the sacrament which ho does not believe 
to be there ? This is a calumny by which Protestants lead the public by the 
*j03e." 

He subsequently adds, 

" They that separate from the church of Rome, as being idolatrous, art 
thereby schismatics before God." 

Mr. Pope has attacked the Catholic clergy for receiving 
money for saying masses. The Catholic clergy depend for 
support upon their flocks ; they possess not the tithes and green 
acres, and the fat of th 3 land. Give them a certain portion o^ 
the tithes and glebes, and I promise you they will never look to 

12* 



138 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

me poor, even for the most trifling compensation We read 
that the labourer is worthy of his hire, and that he who preaches 
the gospel should live by the gospel. Surely Mr. Pope will not 
assert the contrary. 

Mr. Pope. — My opponen has acknowledged, that they who 
perished in the flood, died in mortal sin. Therefore, according 
to Mr. Maguire's own shov^ing, as those spirits were confined 
m the prison spoken of by St. Peter, the prison could not have 
been purgaj( ij. My friend says, that the onus lies on me to 
prove that there is not a third place. I reply, that the onus rests 
on Mr. Maguire to prove the existence of a third place, and 
also to show, that that third place is purgatory. He asks, if 
there was the disposition to repent, would not God forgive the 
sin against the Holy Ghost? Every one who possesses repen- 
tance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, is 
accepted of him; but this sin, whatever it be, appears to inflict 
the awful punishment of judicial blindness. Mr. Maguire has 
lumself admitted, that the sin is unpardonable. I do not decide, 
whether this sin can be committed in the present day ; perhaps, 
the commission of it was confined to the times of the Saviour — 
Mr. Maguire alludes to the cases of Lot and of Jephtha. I 
ynswer, that the scriptures, as a faithful history of human nature, 
DAUst contain narratives of crime ; but yet, do we ever find the 
eacred volume speaking of acts of depravity, in language of 
sanction and commendation? Does the question need a reply? 
The criminal act is either pointedly condemned in the immediate 
context of the narration, or by the spirit and precepts of the 
inspired volume. But what are we to think of the book ol 
Maccabees, which not merely relates an act of suicide ; but pos- 
itively commends it ; " Choosing rather to die nobly^ Nicanor 
struck himself with his sword ?" Is this the authority of inspi- 
ration ? Is this bravery, to fear to meet death by the arm of 
another, and choose rather to fall on his own sword ? My friend 
has alluded to circumcision and baptism. I would say of bap- 
tism, what Paul said of circumcision : 

" He is not a Jew, which is one outwardly ; neither is that circurr cision 
which is outward in the flesh : but he is a Jew which i« one inwardly ; and 
circjnicision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; »vhose 
praise is not of men, but of God." — Rom. ii, 28, 29. 

1 believe that God will never exclude a sinner from heaven, 
if his dependance be founded upon the blood of Jesus, though 
ne be not baptized. Mr. Maguire appears to have a high 
respect for the Established church. I would refer hirn to her 
catechism, which says, that " the sacraments of baptism and tho 
Lord's supper, are gen:rally necessary to salvation." Sb3 doet 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 139 

f»ot say '* absolutely and essentially." Mr. Maguiie has said, 
that the Redeemer made salvation depend upon baptism as a 
condition. " He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved, 
he that believeth not shall be condemned." It does not say, he 
.hat is not baptized shall be condemned. Taking him on his 
own ground, I would ask, does he mean to draw a parallel 
between baptism and the excruciating torments of purgatory, 
even as conditions of salvation? When the jailer at Philippi 
asked, what shall I do to be saved ? St. Paul simply replied 
*' Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved ;" 
afterwards I admit, that he administered baptism as the initiating 
right of Christian communion. My friend has referred to the 
Greek church — the authority of the Greek church weighs but 
little with me. The statement that the Greeks did not believe 
in purgatory, was a quotation from Fisher, the Roman Catholic 
bishop. I omitted to notice one of my friend's quotations fron^ 
scripture in support of purgatory. The omission was of little 
consequence, as in truth, the passage is perfectly and altogether 
irrelevant. I shall read to you the context. 

" We would not have you ignorant, brethren, of our tribulation which came 
to us in Asia, that we were pressed out of measure, above our strength, so 
that we were weary even of life. But we had in ourselves the answer oi 
death, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God who raiseth the deaa, 
V* ho hath delivered, and doth deliver us out of so great dangers ; in whotO 
we trust that he will yet also deliver us, you helping withal in prayer for us; 
that for this gift obtained for us, by the means of many persons, thanks may 
be given by many in our behalf." — 2 Cor. i, 8, 11. 

The last verse which I have read, is that which my opponent 
adduced. Here is nothing about purgatory or prayers for the 
dead ; were the Apostles on earth, or in the world of spirits, 
when this verse was penned ? Need I offer any further com- 
ment to show that no connexion exists between this passage and 
the doctrine of purgatory. 

The verse is just as much connected with purgatory, as that 
which is commonly used as the motto of purgatorian societies—- 

" Have pity on me, have pity on me, at least you my friends, for the hand 
of the Lord hath touched me." — Job. xix, 21. 

A short time since I placed in the hand? of a Roman Catholic 
H Douay Bible, and called his attention to the passage ; and 
great indeed was his astonishment, when he found that it was 
uttered by Job, when Job was on earth. My friend asked, why 
David prayed for the forgiveness of his sins after pardon had 
been announced to him by Nathan, if his sins were aitogethei 
blotted out. I answer, the Christian is conscious that the just 
man falleth seven times a day, and living by faith, requires every 
moment to cry out. " Purge me with hyssop and I shall be cleun." 



140 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORT. 

by reason of the guilt which he is continually, and 1 may pei- 
haps say, sometimes insensibly, contracting. Compare the 
declaration of the council of Trent, on the merit of good worka 
already quoted, with the sacred volume. The Bible says, 

" The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal hfe, through 
Jesus Christ our Lord." — Rom. vi, 23. 

Here is the council of Trent against God himself. My friend 
spoke about confidence ; the confidence of which I spoke waa 
built upon the blood of Christ. He desired those who stood to 
take heed lest they fall. I pray that I may be enabled to com 
ply with the exhortation, God bestowing upon me an humble 
spirit- My opponent has stated that the Apostle says, 

" No man knows whether he be worthy of love or hatred." 

I must confess that I have never met with the passage in the 
sacred scriptures. 

Mr. Maguire deprecates the idea of standing here this day. 
Had I not seen the passage in the Register, which is regarded 
as the organ of Roman Catholic proceedings, this meeting 
would never have taken place. With respect to personalities I 
shall take no notice of them. 

A passage in the sixth -.^neid of Virgil, as translated by Dry- 
den, will serve to throw light upon the origin of purgatory. 

"Nor death itself can wholly wash their stains, 

But long contracted filth even in the soul remains. 

The relics of inveterate vice they wear, 

And spots of sin obscure in every face appear; 

For this are various penances enjoined, 

And some are hung to bleach upon the wind, 

Some plunged in waters, others purged in fires, 

'Till all the dregs are drained, and all the rust expires. 

****** 

Then are they happy, when by length of time 
The scruffis worn away, of each committed crime ; 
No speck is left of their habitual stains, 
But the pure nether of the soul remains." 

One would think that Virgil saw prospectively the purgatory 
of the church of Rome. Here permit me to make a remark, 
that I cannot discover, by what process fire, which is material, 
can purify an immaterial essence. I proceed to demonstrate 
from the sacred volume, in addition to the arguments which 
have been already adduced in refutation of the doctrine of pur- 
gatory, that the souls of believers pass after death immediately 
to everlasting rest. If the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from 
all sin, then assuredly the man, who has thus been cleansed, is 
translated at once into the realms of eternal glory. 

In the fourth book of Kings, (or, as we have it, the second] 
and twenty-second chapter, it is written, 



THE DOCTRINE OF lURGATORT. I4l 

•* Therefore, I will gather thee to thy Fathers, and thou shall be gathcsred 
to triy sepulchre in peace, that thint eyes may not see all the evils which 
will bring upon this place." 

I ask, would such a promise have been made to king Josiah, 
if the soul was to pass from the trials of this world to the agoni- 
zing sufferings of a purgatorial fire. In the second of Corin 
tliians, chap, v, 1st to 8th verse, the Apostle writes : 

^* For we know, if our earthly house of this habitation be dissolved, that wt 
have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in heaven ; 
for in this also we groan, desiring to be clothed upon with our habitation that 
E8 from heaven ; yet, so that we be found clothed, not naked ; for we also 
who are in the tabernacle do groan, being burthened, because we would not 
be unclothed, but clothed upon, that that which is mortal may be swallowed 
up by life. Now, he that maketh us for this very thin^ is frod ; who hath 
given us the pledge of the Spirit ; therefore, having all this confidence, know- 
ing, that while we are in the body, we are absent from the Lord ; for we 
walk by faith and not by sight ; but we are confident, and have a good will 
\o be absent rather from the body, and to be present with the Lord." 

Would the Apostle have made use of such language, if he 
believed that he had to pass through a purgatory ? 

" To be absent from the body" and " to be present with the 
Loid," we find, are in the case of the believer, according to the 
Apostle, synonymous expressions : and " in ihe body," and 
" absent from the Lord," are likewise identified. The Apostle 
says, in Philippians first chapter 21st to 23d verse : 

" To me to live 's Christ, and to die is gain ; and if to li\^ in the flesh, this 
IS to me the fruit of labour ; and what I shall choose I know not ; but I am 
straightened between two, having a desire to be dissolved, and to be with 
Christ, a thing by far the better." 

A passage which is still more direct, is found in the thirteenth 
verse of the fourteenth chapter of Revelations : 

" And I heard a voice from heaven, saying unto me, write, Blessed are the 
iead which die in the Lord, from henceforth ; yea saith the Spirit, that they 
may rest from their labours j and their works do follow them." 

Why are those who die in the Lord, blessed ? Is it, that, 
delivered from the toils of the flesh, they go to purgatory ? Are 
they blessed, if enduring the intensity of purgatorial fire? No; 
but through the grace of God, when the summons goeth forth, 
they are translated from the changes and sorrows of this mortal 
scene to the regions of eternal felicity. Surely the child of God, 
instead of in any degree looking forward to the period of his 
dissolution as the commencement of eternal blessedness, if he 
must first pass through the lake of purgatorial fire, would doubt- 
less stand s;bivering on the brink. The people of God whether 
they live or die, are the Lord's. Would the Apostle assert that 
the Lord's people are blessed after death, if they had to suffer 
in purgatoiy on their way to glory ? I have spoked on Mr. 
Sdaguire's arguments ; [ have considered his quotations from 



142 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

scripture, and proved that they do not support the doctrine of 
purgatory : I have shown that such a tenet is inconsistent with 
the character of God, and derogatory to the Redeemer's sacri- 
iuie. We have seen, upon the testimony of holy writ, that the 
blood of Jesus Christ is perfectly competent for the salvation 
of sinners : we have seen Fathers against Fathers : I trust, we 
shall no longer repose impHcit dependance upon them. The 
Bible, and the Bible alone, as the revelation of God, is the word 
by which we shall be judged. That word directly shov^ s us, that 
the soul of the I'cal Christian having been emancipaicd from the 
body passes immediately to a state of felicity. We have also 
seen, that the doctrine of purgatory carries on the very face of it 
a contradiction to the sacred scriptures, in the distinction which 
it establishes between the rich and the poor. And here I would 
join issue with one who was well acquainted with the system of 
the church of Rome, a converted priest : and if I use stro^ig 
expressions, I mean no offence to the feelings of my Romau 
Catholic auditors — but I would endeavour to reach the judgment 
and the conscience. The writer to whom I allude says, 

" The doctrine of purgatory is of heathen origin, intended to cheat the sim- 
ple out of their money, by giving them bills of exchange upon another world 
for cash paid in this, without any danger of the bills returning protested." — 
Meagher. 

Spare your smiles, my friends: the subject is too momentouw: 
it is the salvation of the immortal and never-dying spirit, on 
which we are discoursing ; it is the honor of EmmanuePj 
atonement that we are vindicating. Will you not, in agreement 
with scripture, give your universal verdict against a doctrine 
which would rob the believer of his peace, which would throw 
around the glorious attributes of heaven's sovereign, the funeial 
pall of darkness and abscurity, which would transform a God of 
love into a God of terror, mingle our paltry "satisfactions" with 
the agonies of Calvary, and attach to the seamless robe of Christ's 
righteousness, woven from Bethlehem to the Cross, the tattered 
vestments of personal suffering 1 As to men of sense, I appeal 
to the Roman Catholic clergy. Though we differ, still, as a 
friend, I would say, "take care lest you are not bringing down 
upon your heads the curses of innumerable immortal spirits." 
We are all on our progress to an eternal world ; we must ail 
onward, whether we will or not, to our journey's end ; our pil- 
grimage will soon terminate, and the exclusive objects of our 
concern then will be the great realities of an eternal world. Let 
us then, Protestant and Roman Cathohcs, while we are on the 
way, look to Jesus, the only hope set before sinners ; let us kisi 
(he Son, lest he be angry, and the door of niercy be for everclosed 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. \i^ 

Mr. Maguire. — Gentlemen, after the very pathetic sermon 
•vhich you have just heard, the feeHngs of many of you must be 
in no small degree excited. I shall merely observe that I have 
not come here to preach, but to argue — to examine evidence, 
and expose sophistry. Mr. Pope has given us a history of 
witchcraft in the tenth century. — It is but a few days ago tha^ 
several men were tried in Bible-reading England, for assaulting 
and nearly killing a poor old woman under the impression that 
she was a witch. She was supposed t > have bewitched a colt, 
and she was actually made to go under the colt's tail and pray 
for its health and prosperity! This occurred in England where 
there are ten Bibles for one head. Mr. Pope calls the sin 
against the Holy Ghost an act of judicial blindness. Does he 
hold that for a sin which a man has committed fifty years before 
his death, and for which he has sincerely repented, the gates of 
heaven will be shut against him, and he will be condemned to 
eternal reprobation ? Is Christ's blood to be of no avail to that 
repentant sinner? Is such the doctrine of Mr. Pope? I be- 
seech you all to examine the New Testament, and you will find 
in almost every page of it, a contradiction to such a doctrine. 
I may here beg to recall your senses which have been floating 
upon that magical hemisphere created by the wonderful eloquence 
of my friend, and direct your attention to the arguments he has 
advanced. Mr. Pope says that the sacraments of the church 
of England, namely, baptism, and the Lord's supper, are gen "r- 
ally necessary to salvation. Mr. Pope should understand the 
word " generally," as theologians do, to mean that in soma 
instances the sacraments maybe dispensed with ; for mart)!- 
dom, in the opinion of theologians, suffices as a substitute for 
baptism. If Mr. Pope understands " generally," in that sense, 1 
quite agree with him. But if he denies that baptism is necessary 
to all Christians who have the opportunity of receiving itj as a 
requisite for salvation, I propose to him the distinct text of 
scripture — 

" Amen, I say unto you except a man be born again of water and the Holj 
Ghost he cannot have life in him." 

If the God of heaven thought fit to appoint a third place foi 
Iho purifying of souls from sin after their departure from this 
life, is not Mr Pope guilty of blasphemy, in thus calling the all- 
mse God to an account ? Christ does not derogate from the 
efficacy of his own merits by the establishment of a third place ; 
and the only question is, was there such a place de facto esta- 
bhshed ? Mr. Pope has argued all through upon the assumption 
that I believe that all souls should go to purgatory in the iirs< 
instance — I h Dpe on the contrary, that many go direct to heaveu, 



144 THE DO';TRINK UF PURGATORY. 

and a few comparatively to j/urgatory. Is it not evident, lial 
if many souls go directly to iieaven, that does not militate against 
the doctiine of purgatory Because some souls should go di- 
rectly to heaven, it would be fcolish in the extreme to argue that 
no suoh place as purgatory existed. T challenge Mr. Po^e to 
produce a single direct proof from scripture against purgatory. 
Every passage which he has quoted is perfectly consistent with 
the existence of a third place. 

Before I proceed further, let me read to you the following 
passage from the pen of that candid Protestant divine, the learned 
Dr. Thorndyke, in his "Just We ghts and Measures." Speak- 
ing of the doctrine promulgated by Luther, as to the justification 
by faith only, he says, — 

"Can it fall within the sense of a Christian to imagine, that he can be 
restored by a *Lor(l have mercy on me?' No, it must cost him hot. tears and 
sighs, and groans, and extraordinary prayers, with fasting and alms. Those 
who assure sinners of pardon and the favour of God, with such means of true 
repentance, whether it be themselves, or their false teachers, plainly murder 
their souls," 

Is not that a strong passage against the Lutheran and Cal- 
vin istic doctrine of justification by faith only^ which has been 
adopted by Mr. Pope 1 The inutility of good works is a pleas- 
ing doctrine to promulgate ; — it ministers to the passions of 
mankind, and encourages every species of immorality. 

Mr. Pope talked of Job, and he stated that a Roman Catholic 

was astonished on his telling him that Job used the following 

words, while he was in this life : — 

*'Hav'e pity on me, have pity on me, at least you my friends, because the 
hand of the Lord hath touched me." 

I now assert that generally speaking, learned commentators 
»^ree, that Job there speaks in the spirit of prophecy of himself 
1 hen dfsad, that his language related to Jesus Christ, whose 
death or the cross would redeem them, and that he therein 
i ilicited the prayers of the friends about him when he departed 
fiom thijj life. Such is the sense in which I find this passage 
understood by the learned commentators. But I had nevei 
quoted the text in support of the doctrine of purgatory, and Mr. 
Pope is therefore only building castles in the air, for the purpose 
of pulling them down. Is not the doctrine of Mr. Pope, on the 
head of justification by faith, directly Calvinistic? He has ap^ 
peared afraid to express the opinion which he evidently enter* 
tains, that the blood of Christ is sufliicient alone to save us ; as 
if ofur Saviour himself had not annexed to the promise of salva- 
tion, many co-operating conditions, the fulfilment of which is 
accessary on the part of man — Hear what our Saviour says, 

** But if thou wilt enter into heaven k ep the commandments.^^ 

**Unieas you do penance you shall all likewise oerish-" -Matdiew, xix, 17 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 145 

I have already proved that the word ^Bxavoia was used in 
reference to the repentance of the men of Nineveh, and that 
repentance we are told in scripture, consisted of the works of 
penance, fasting, and similar mortifications. 

I defy any Protestant, who, like Mr. Pope, mamtains the right 
of private judgment, to prove that the Bible is the inspired word 
of God. The Protestant must take it upon trust from the 
Catholic church. They receive the sacred scriptures from a 
'jhurch whose authority they refuse to acknowledge. 

Mr. Pope has again recurred to the origin of the present dis- 
cussion, and repeated that the passage in the speech published 
v\ the Register, first gave occasion to it. Mr. Pope has spoken 
no of that paper being the organ of the Catholic body — that 
may be true, — but I will here say that the editor of the Register 
had nothing to do with the speech in question. He should not 
be held responsible for it, unless it had been given in by the 
gentleman who furnishes the regular reports for that journal. 
[ have already disclaimed the accuracy of the report in question. 
I have on the first day, stated to this assembly, how Mr. Pope's 
challenge was sent round in green bags through my parish, and 
that a copy of it was served regularly upon me at breakfast after 
mass in the presence of several Protestants. Let Mr. Pope 
employ what arguments he may think fit against my creed. I 
shall not descend to personalities — even if he make a parcel of 
crabs crawl across this table, and state that they are souls on 
their journey to purgatory. I shall not accuse him of person- 
ality. Mr. Pope forsooth has made a noble discovery. He 
proves from a passage taken from the sixth book of Virgil's 
jEneid, that the Catholic church has stolen the idea of purgatory 
from the pagan mythology. Virgil likewise speaks of hell 
' Vill Mr. Pope say that the doctrine of hell has been also stole j 
from the mythology of the heathens 1 I think I may make him 
a full present of the notable argument which he has founded 
upon the sixth book of the -Eneid. 

Mr. Pope says, that he cannot conceive how the fire of pur* 
gatovy can act upon immaterial souls. This was precisely the 
objei,tion started by Voltaire against the doctrine of hell — namely 
that fire could not act upon the human soul. That celebrated 
infidel, therefore, contended that the soul must be annihilated 
after its separation from the body ; and he ridiculed as incou 
sistent and absurd, the doctrine of future rewards and punish- 
ments. The shade of Voltaire will, no doubt, feel extremely 
obliged to Mr. Pope. 

Mr. Pope eternally recurs to the merits of the Redeemer's 
bloody in order to throw dust in the eyes of his hearers. There 
18 not a nftan on earth places more dependance than I do upon 

\^ 



i4b' rHE liatJTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

Lhe sacred blood of our divine Redeemer. I feel that my etei 
nal salvation is a doubtful matter, but I hold, with the Catholic 
church, that the merits of Christ's blood have out-balanced all 
sin. I believe that millions will be blessed in tfie Redeemer's 
name. Mr. Pope insists that the doctrine of the utilit) of good 
woiks detracts from the merits of Christ's sacrifice. 1 1 remains 
for Mr. Pope to show that sin is sanctioned by heaven : or that 
because good works are rewarded by our Saviour, he therefor© 
derogates from his own infinite merits. We believe that all men 
vho are saved are saved alone through the merits of Christ. 
As it is not derogatory to Christ to be an intercessor with the 
Father, neither is it derogatory to Christ to have intercessors 
under him. Mr. Pope's attempt to throw discredit upon the holy 
Fathers does not look well for his cause. I beg you to recollect 
the argument which I proposed respecting the Fathers — and 
which argument, as Mr. Pope has not condescended to notice it, 
I shall here repeat — either the Fathers in their writings published 
what was the acknowledged doctrine of the church or they did 
not. If they did publish the established doctrine of the church, 
Mr. Pope must give up the first ages of Christianity, and the first 
councils, and admit that there never was a period when such doc- 
trine was not taught by the church. If the doctrines promulga- 
ted by the Fathers were not those entertained by the chv.^ch, why 
did not the church then disclaim them, and condemn tLur opin- 
ions ? Why did not the heretics quote the Fathers, as opposed 
to the Catholic church 1 Mr. Pope has given some quotations 
from the Fathers. As soon as the substance of the present con- 
troversy is drawn up and duly authenticated, I shall repair to the 
library at Manchester, and there examine the genuine editions^ 
of the Fathers, in order to ascertain the authenticity and correct- 
ness of the quotations read by Mr. Pope. The quotations which 
he has given are taken upon second hand authority. He ha> 
had them, I believe §bsieiricante manu. 

My quotations remain uncontroverted and incontrovertible. I 
would recall the attention of all candid Protestants present to 
this fact, that I have proved my doctrine by three distinct pas- 
sages from scripture, which have not been explained by my op- 
ponent — I have quoted Fathers who adduce the same texts of 
scripture in support of the doctrine of purgatory. Were Jerome, 
Augustine, Cyprian, Tertullian, and Origen, down to the fifth 
century, all wrong in their opinions on this subject 1 Will you 
prefer the private judgment of Mr. Pope before the unanimous 
consent of the holy Fathers and the authority of the church ? 

Dr. Johnson, one of the greatest men that England ever saw, 
admitted the reasonableness of the doctrine of purgatory. Ht; 
acknowledged that it was a holy and reasonable doctrir #, and hf 



THE DOCTRIiSE OF PURGAlORT. I4"i 

accordingly offered up prayers for the departed soul of his mother. 
What Dr. Johnson held and acknowledged, few Protestants need 
be ashamed of. 

Negative proofs alone were those to which Mr. Pope has had 
recourse. I have advanced no position in proof of the doctrine 
of purgatory, which I have not founded upon at least two direct 
and positive texts of scripture. I have also brought forward 
the holy Fathers in support of the doctrine which I :iiaintain. 1 
have proved that all antiquity concurred in giving the same mean- 
ing which I now give, to the texts of scripture which I have 
quoted. It must be acknowledged, even by Protestants, that 
those holy Fathers, who lived immediately after the Apostles, and 
many of whom are canonized saints, form a great and powerful 
authority, as to the doctrines of the church in the early ages o{ 
Christianity. Mr. Pope will not admit the authority of the 
church, nor will he give credit to the collective wisdom of tho 
holy Fathers. 

We read, that God will render to every man according to his 
works. If God plunges a man, for an idle word, into hell for all 
eternity, where will a place be found for Antichrist, or for Nero, 
Caligula, Domitian, and the other monsters of vice who have 
disgraced the human form 1 W^here is a place of adequate pun- 
ishment to be found for them, if a man be condemned everlast- 
ingly for the expression of a single idle word ] Yet we read in 
St. John the words of our Lord, that 

" Unless a man be born again of water, and the Holy Ghost, he shall not 
enter the kingdom of heaven." 

Is the doctrine propounded by Mr. Pope consistent with the 
justice and mercy of God ] Protestants should beware of the 
doctrine that asserts they must go directly and at once either to 
heaven or hell. The alternative is a dreadful one, and obviously 
does not consist with the goodness and mercy of God. 

It is evident that the texts of Scripture are on my side. Has 
Mr. Pope quoted a single text directly against the doctrine which 
I advocate, or in contradiction to the texts whicn I have read to 
you ] Weigh that fact in your minds. 

Mr. Pope has attempted to cast discredit upon the utility ol 
good works. Now I ask him, how can a merciful God punish lat 
tternally^for had ivorksy if he will give me no credit for my good 
mea ? I had been led to believe that the giving of even a cup 
of cold water should have its reward. I have already stated 
that good works avail not per se, but through the infinite merits 
of our Redeemei, who will reward the efforts of poor man, to 
co-operate with divine grace, in the atonement fir his manifest 
^ansgressions. 



<4S THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

Mr. Pope — As to the sermon which my learned opponent 
accuses me of preaching, it originated from the fact^ that there 
were no arguments to which I had to reply. He has, indeed, 
dealt in broad assertions, but not in argument, Mr. Maguire has 
much objected to the expression, "judicial blindness." He 
should ren ember, that the constitution of the mind is framed by 
the God of mind. When we habitually resist the convictiops 
of our judgments, the darkness of the understanding is mcreased, 
lo that at length we cannot discover truth from falsehood : this 
is judicial blindness. If it he the fad that so few go to purgatorij^ 
as JMr, JMaguire asserts^ then I hope that the number of masses 
fof souls suffering in purgaivry will be in proportion diminished. 
J brought forward the passage from Job, as equalling in irrelev- 
ancy, Mr. Maguire's quotation from 2 Cor. i, 11. My opponent 
has asserted, that we are indebted for the holy scriptures to the 
church of Rome. I deny the position. Were there not various 
churches beside the church of Rome ? Has my friend never 
heard of the Greek, the Abyssinian, the Chaldean, the Syrian, or 
the Waldensian churches ? These all possessed the scriptures. 
To employ an illustration, which I have used on other occasions. 
If I desired a draught of water, and six or seven streams flowing 
towards me, should go and plunge my vessel into the nearest 
stream, I may be thus addressed by the proprietor of one of the 
nvulets : — " Sir, you are entirely dependant on me for water 
but you shall not draw it from this stream ; it belongs to me." 
1 might reply, " I am not exclusively indebted to you or depen- 
dant upon your fountain : there are five or six other streams at 
hand ; you may, if you please, debar me of access to your well, 
l^f'it 1 can put my bucket into other springs, and take a refresh- 
hg draught.," 

Mr. Maguire remarks, that ray observation on the incompe- 
tt.ncy of material fire to purge an immaterial spirit, coincides 
with that of Voltaire. I hold, that although a spirit cannot suffer 
from material substance, it can be taught to suffer by being 
brought into contact with spirit. When the spirit is re-united to 
the corporeal frame, then the body may suffer from material lire. 
My opponent says, that the Fathers in the quotations, which he 
adduced relative to purgatory, either gave the mind of the church 
or they did not : if they did not, why did not the church protest 
mgainst them : if they did give the mind of the church, why is 
not the doctrine which he says they propound, received ? In reply, 
I say. that the quotations from the Fathers, -^hich I have adduced 
in refutation of purgatory, either gave the mind of the church, 
or they did not : if they did not, why were they not protested 
against ; if they did, why is not the doctrine received which they 
flupport? Therefore, we have Fathers against Fathers. 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 1-19 

My opponent asked que:;=tions in the last half hour yesterday 
nrhen he knew they could not be replied to. lie has said that i 
have not given my rule of faith. I beg to be permitted to den^i 
this assertion. 1 again and again stated, that the bibie is my 
RULE OF FAITH. 1 uever asserted that God suffered. Christ 
suffered not in his divinity, but in his human nature : and ihe 
union of deity with manhood, stamped an infinite value upon his 
sufferings. I shall now proceed to prove the inspiration, canon- 
icity, integrity, authenticity, and genuineness of the sacred vol- 
ume. From the short time allowed, I shall be under the necessity 
of condensing my remarks within a small compass. I would 
first ask, how does the church of Rome decide upon these ques- 
tions ? Is it by inspiration ? My opponent, I am convinced, 
ioes not entertain such an opinion. It is then on evidence ; 

AND IS NOT evidence TANGIBLE TO OTHERS AS WELL AS TO 

THE CHURCH OF RoME ? My friend has made an observation 
to this effect, that I disregarded aggregate wisdom. The asser- 
tion, permit me to say, is unfounded. I deny not, that in the 
multitude of counsellors there is safety. Surely the wisdom of 
a collective body may be serviceable, though not endowed with 
the prerogative of infallibility. — As to the inspiration of the sys- 
tem, revealed in scripture : all are convinced that we need a 
revelation. The light of nature can in no wise discover to us a 
plan, by which the Deity, in perfect harmony with his unchang- 
ing perfections, can pardon guilty man. Socrates looked tor 
such a revelation. The law of opinion is continually fluctuating, 
and does not furnish animmutable standard of morals. Do we 
not want something to cheer and console us amidst the vicissi- 
tudes and troubles of life ? When we look beyond the portals 
of the grave, do we not require a ray of truth to illuminate the 
darkness of the tomb 1 By nature we know little of God, little 
of ourselves, little of our destinies. Here is a volume which 
purports to be a revelation from heaven. I study it, and find in 
it a sublime display of the divine perfections, a scheme of redem}>- 
tKjn perfectly adapted to my circumstances, a perfect code of 
morals, a system whose tendency is to diffuse happiness on earth, 
and to smooth the rugged brow of death ; so that the volume 
bears upon its very front the broad impress of heaven. I find 
Ihat it has condensed the fragments of truth that are scattered 
through the world, into a glorious whole. I find that it explains 
the mazes and labyrinths of life, and brings glory to God in the 
highest, and speaks peace on earth, good will towards men. Its 
two great divisions, the Old and New Testament, contain prophe 
cies which have been fulfilled in the destruction of kingdoms. 
and in events which history has recorded. The Jews are scat- 
tered throughout the world, and are s*ill a distinct people. Lord 

13* 



150 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

Chesterfield, with all his infidelity was obliged to say, that he 
never could get over the state of the Jews as a testimony to the 
truth of scripture. From what origin could such a S3''stem have 
sprung? It could never have emanated from the schools of 
antiquity. The schools were incapable of discovering the char- 
acter of God, or of devising such a scheme of morals. Ancient 
philosophers were, compaiatively, children on the subject of 
moral obligation. If philosophy could not impai*t such truth, 
wc must look to some other source, and I find — that source is 
heaven. What object, I would ask, could the Apostles have 
had m attempting to deceive mankind ? Was it temporal inter- 
est? No — they exposed themselves to persecution and death. 
When, therefore, I find the system which they have revealed, 
according with the voice of nature, adapted to the circumstan- 
ces of man, accurately describing his character, and palpably 
embodying in itself the attributes of Jeho\ah, I cannot avoid 
asking, 

" Whence, but from heaven, should men unskilled in arts, 

In different ages born, in different parts, 

Weave such agreeing truths, or how, or why, 

Should all conspire to cheat us with a lie, 

Unasked their pains, ungrateful their advice, 

Starving their gains, and martyrdom their price ?" — Drtden. 

Having made these observations on the inspiration of the sys- 
tem contained in the sacred records, I beg to remark, that the 
man convinced that the system is divine, does not experience 
much difficulty respecting the canon of scripture. The illiterate 
person never troubles himself upon the subject. He finds a 
balm for his sorrows in the word of life — a medicine for his soul, 
drawn from the laboratory of truth, prepared by the great Phy- 
sician of Souls. As to the canonicity of the sacred volume : 
what is the evidence respecting any work, such as Virgil oi 
Horace, but the testimony of the ancients 1 This testimony is 
infinitely more conclusive in support of the sacred scriptures. 
We shall commence with the fourth century, (it being unneccb- 
sary to begin with the writers of a later period) and take you 
through successive witnesses up to the first century, when we 
have the five Apostolic Fathers. Allow me to trespass upon 
your attention by mentioning the names of some of the writers. 
In the fourth century, we have numerous quotations from the 
New Testament in the writings of St. Athanasius, Ephiphaniusj 
Jerome, Rufinus, Augustin, Eusebiiis, and Cyril, Gregory Na- 
zienzen, Philaster, Arnobius, Lactantius, and others. In th« 
hird century, we find various passages from the New Testa- 
r^ent, occurring in the writings of Novatus, Dionysius, Commo- 
-tfi, Anatolius, Theognostus, Methodius, Phileus, "Victorinust 



THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORV. 15i 

Cyprian, Caius, and others. In the second century, Tertullian 
Clemens Alexandrinus, Theophihis of Antioch, Athenagoras 
IrenjEus of Lyons, Melito, Tatian, Hegesippus, Justin Martyr, 
and Papias, contain numerous references to the New Testa.neut 
This chain of evidence brings us to the five Apostolic Fathers: 
Barnabas, Clemens, Romanus, Hermas, Ignatius and Polycaip. 
In the fourh century we have catalogues of the books of the 
New Testament made by St. Athanasius, (39 Ep. Fest. t. i, p. 
961, E. 962, C.) Jerome, (De Stud. Script, ad Paul in. ep. 50, 
al. 103, t. iv, p. 2, p. 574, ed. Bened.) Rufinus, (Expos. Symb. 
Apost.) Augustin, (De Doctr. Christ. 1. 2, cap. viii, n. 12, 13, 
14, torn, iii, p. 1, Benedict.) and Epiphanius, (Panar. h. 76, p. 
941.) most accurately agreeing with the present received canon. 
If this evidence be sufficient to satisfy every candid man, as 
to the canonicity of the books of the New Testament, ^hat por- 
tion of the sacred oracles will enable us to conclude respecting 
the canonicity of the books of the Oltl. Almost al' the books 
of the Old Testament are quoted in the New, as may be seen 
by consulting the short appendix to Canne's Bible. The Jews, 
as I have already stated, did not receive the apocrypha. The 
passage to that effect from Bellarmine, is as follows : 

" Omnes libros quos Protestantes non recipiunt," &c. 
" All the books which the Protestants do not receive, the Jews also do not 
admit." — Lib. i, De verb. Dei. c. 10, principio et sect ad locum. 

In the beginning of the sixteenth century, the Compultenstian 
Polyglot was published by Ximenes, Cardinal and Archbishop 
of Toledo, in Spain. In the preface to the reader, there is a 
special admonition given, that the books o^ Tobit, Judith, Wis- 
dom, Ecclesiasticus and the Maccabees, with the additions to 
Esther, which are set forth in the Greek only, are not canonical 
scripture. The words are these — 

" But the books without the canon, which the church receives rather for the 
edification of the people, than for confirming the authority of ecclesiastica* 
dogmas, are given in Greek only, but with a double interpretation." 

About this time, the Vulgate Bible with Lira's commentary 
and the ordinary gloss, was printed at B-asil ; in the preface we 
*ead as follows : 

"Since there are many, who because they do not bestow attention upon the 
uacred scriptures, suppose that all the books which are contained in the Bible, 
are to b3 venerated with like respect, not knowinghow to distinguish between 
csinonical and uncanonical books, (which the Jews reckon amongst the apoc- 
rypha) from whence they often appear ridiculous to the learned, therefore, vve 
have distinguished and distinctly enumerated, first, the canonical books, and 
afterwards the uncanonical ; between which there is as much difference, aa 
between that which is certain and that which is dubious ; f »r the canonicaj 
book s were composed by the dictation of the Holy Spirit, but it is not known 
gt wicU time, or hy lohat authors the uncanonical^ oi' i7i ether wards j the apocry* 



152 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 

phal btoks ivete set forth; but the canonical books are of so great authority, 
that wliatsoever is there contained, the church holds as true, firmly and with- 
out question." 

Permit me to add, that the Redeemer, who pointedly censured 
the Jews for making void the word of God by their traditions, 
would still have strongly condemned them, if they had left out of 
their canon any part of the word of God. 

With respect to the uncorrupted preservation of the Old Tes- 
tament, let us bear in mind the great care with which the Jews 
preserved it. Philo Judceus informs us, that the Jews regarded 
the Old Testament with such profound veneration, that they even 
counted the letters, that they discarded a copy which contained 
a single error, and would rather lose their hves than alter the 
original in the slightest degree. — (Philo. ap. Euseb. de. Praep. 
Evang. lib. viii, c. 2.) How could the Old Testament have been 
adulterated previously to the Saviour ] The Jews were divided 
into sects. The Talmudists and the Caraites would naturally 
watch over their common scripture with jealousy. Could the 
Samaritans have been prevailed upon to unite with the Jews in 
corrupting the Pentateuch i After the commencement of the 
Christian era, the Old Testament was in the hands of Christians 
as well as Jews. Had the Jews left out any portion of the 
Old Testament, would they not have omitted the passages which 
condemned the conduct of their leaders, which speak of the 
dolatries of the people as sanctioned by their priesthood, and 
which predict their treatment of the Messiah? but these are stiiJ 
found in the Old Testament. The quotations from the Old 
Pe^^tament in the Fathers coincide with the same passages a.s 
they stand in our Bible ; from this fact also we infer, that tho 
Old Testament has not been corrupted since their time. Tht^ 
New Testament has been dispersed in different countries. The 
^^ariety of sects which have existed, watched it with such jealous 
care, that none could have mutilated it. We have many ancien' 
translations. Drs. Kennicott and Bentley have examin^^^d 
numberless manuscripts, both of the Old and New Testament. 
Dr. Bentley, speaking of the various readings, says, 

" I, for my part, and, as I believe, many others, would not lament, if out o\ 
the old MSS. yet untouched, 10,000 more were faithfully collected : some o( 
which, without question, would render the text more beautiful, just andexart ; 
though of no consequence to the main of religion nay, perhaps, whclly syn- 
onymous in the view of common readers, and quiie insensible in any modem 
version."- -Philaleuth. Lipsieus. p. 90. 

These are proofs which must satisfy every candid inquirer, as 
lo the canonicity and uncorrupted preservation of the sacred 
volume. 

I pass on rapidly to my proofs of the authenticity of scripture, 
Tbe primitive Christian Fathers, and others were compeUent 



THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE REFORM IVTION. 15J 

judges as to matters of fact. And can we believe, that so nnany 
would have deserted the schools of philosophy, enrolled them- 
selves amongst the persecuted disciples of Jesus Christ, and 
have suffered martyrdom itself, if they had not been convinced, 
upon sound evidence, of the authenticity of the facts recorded 
in the inspired volume ? With respect to the genuineness of the 
New Testament : contrast the several books ; mark the coin- 
cidence between the history of the writers and their respective 
writings ; observe the style of each — the gospel of St. Luke ig 
of purer Greek than the others — this circumstance is accounted 
for by the fact, that Luke was a physician, and consequently 
possessed, it is presumed, some share of learning. We have 
many Hebraisms and Syriacisms in the New Testament, by 
which we know that the writers were Jews ; for their thoughts 
being transfused into Greek, the diction contracted a tincture 
from the medium through which they passed. On the other 
hand, but few of the Fathers knew any thing of Hebrew. 

Allow me here to remark, that in thus appealing to the mere 
evidence of historical testimony — I am not departing from my 
principles. The " modus tradendi," the mode of handing doivn, 
and the " res tradita," the thing handed down, are altogether 
different. Cardinal Bellarmine mentions the evidences by which 
a book is known to be canonical, " first, from the testimonials oi 
the ancients — secondly, from its likeness and agreement with 'he 
Other books — thirdly, from the common sense and taste ol Chris« 
tian people." — De Verb. Dei. 1. c. 10. 

" He that is spiritual judgeth things," says the Apojde Paul. 
1 Cor. ii, 15. Let the man of a spiritual mind, read the 
apocrypha, and his taste and feeling will nauseate much that i& 
contained therein ; nor will he find the same spirit in jaem which 
pervades the books of holv writ. 



Fourth Day. — Monday, April 23. 



SUBJECT. — " The Justification of the Reformation 

Admiral Oliver and Christopher Fitzsimon, Esq., iu 
die chair. 

Mr. Maguire rose, and called on Mr. Pope to justify the 
Reformers. 

Mr. Pope. — Mr. Maguire has called upon me for a justifica- 
tion of the Reformers : but permit me to remind you, gentJ emeu, 



\54 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

that I stand up on the present occasion to justify the separatioi 
from the Church of Rome which took place at the commence- 
ment of the 16th century. 1 wish it to be distinctly understood 
that I stand not here to vindicate every act of the reformers : it 
is the separation from the church of Rome which I am to justify. 
If I were for a moment to admit (which I by no means do) that 
the reformers were the most abandoned characters upon earth — 
if, for argument's sake, I were to make this concession, it would 
not interfere with the question before us, which is — were the 
reformers justified in separating from the church of Rome in the 
16th century? The reformers, His true, had their failings like 
other men ; but this is to be accounted for, partly from the natural 
weakness of human nature, and partly from the influence of the 
system which they had just abandoned. It is difficult for a per- 
son, long accustomed to habits of indolence and profligacy, 
instantaneously to engage in the activities of life — at once to 
shake off the chrysahs, and stand forth in all the beauty and 
proportion of moral rectitude. Suppose that you had been con- 
6ned in a gloomy dungeon for twenty or thirty years ; when first 
you are led forth to enjoy the light and liberty of heaven, is it 
not natural to think, that you could not for some time enjoy the 
perfect exercise of your visual organs 1 

I would justify the separation from the church of Rome upon 
two grounds : the first is, the degraded moral character 
DF THE CHURCH OF RoME at the time of the Reformation ; 
and the second is, the unscriptural nature of the peculiar 
DOCTRINES OF THAT CHURCH. As to the moral character of 
the church of Rome, I might only refer you to the quotations 
^hich I have already adduced ; but to these I beg to add some 
others. You will bear in mind that they are the testimonies of 
Roman Calhoiic writers. 

Cardinal Baronius says, in the close of the 10th century : — 

*' What then was the face of the Roman church ? How very filthy, when 
the most powerful and sordid harlots then ruled at Rome, at whose pleasure, 
sees were changed, and bishoprics were given, and — which is horrible to hear, 
and most abominable — their gallants were obtruded into the see of Peter, and 
made false popes ; for who can say they could be lawful Popes, who were 
obtruded by such harlots without law ? There was no mention of the electic»\ 
itr consent of clergy ; the canons were silent, the decrees of Popes suppressed, 
the ancient traditions proscribed, — lust, armed with the secular power, chal- 
lenged all things to itself.— ****** 
♦ t******** 

What kind of Cardinals, do you imagine, must be then chosen by those rortn- 
steis, when nothing is so natural as for Hke to beget like? who can doubt, 
ut they in all thingt^. did consent to those that chose them ? Who will not 
easdy believe that they animated them and followed their footsteps ? Who 
understands not that such men must wish that our Lord would have slepf 
continually, and never have awoke to judgement to take cognizance ot <K 
pnciah thdr iniquities." — Annal. Tom. x, A. D. 912, Art 8. 



IHE REFORMATION. 155 

or the 11th century Baronius writes, — 

" That it was by Dithmarus styled the iron age, because iniquity did then 
■bound, and that many did then discourse and beheve, that in this very age 
antichrist was to conif^, and the world was to have an -end : and the corrup* 
tkon of manners which then (saith he) was very great, especially among thi 
e^lesiastics, might easily persuade men that it would be so.'' — A. D. 1001. 

)n the 16th century, in the council of Lateran, under Juhan 
ihe Second, it is declared that, 

" Oppression, rapine, adultery, incest, and all pestilent vices, did confoind 
ail sacred and profane things, and that the same beat St. Peter's ship sq 
impetuously, that it was almost drowned." 

" Whit may we think," said Platina, " will become of our age, wherein our 
sins al^ grown so great, that they have scarce left us any room with God tc 
obtain mercy. How great the covetousness of the priests is, and especiall} 
Of' such as rule among them ; how great the lusts of all sects : what ambition 

f)omp, pride, what ignorance both of themselves, and Christian doctrine, wha< 
ittle religion, and that but hypocritical rather than true, what corrupt manners 
to be detested even in lay people, I need not say ; when they sin so openl} 
and publicly, as if they sought for commendation thereby." 

Nicolaus de Clemangis, an archdeacon in the church of Rome 
•n the 15th century, in his epistle, where he speaks of flying no. 
only with oar minds from Babylon but with our bodies also, 
writes thus,- — 

" Who can there safely hve, where not only wicked things are lawful, but 
all men are compelled by the severest punishments to believe, speak, and 
follow the mobt wicked and ungodly things ; and to embrace them as things 
just and laudable ; where they do not only not receive sound doctrine^ bu* 
bitterly persecute all those who do resist the madness of their wills ? * * 
What is it, think you, to be drunk with the cup of Babylon, but from lon^ 
conversation with her to be so infected with the contagion of her, that follow- 
ing the erring herd, you willingly embrace false things for true ; perverse, for 
'ghteous, mad thiags for sound: and to desire rather to be mad with the 
iiiultitude, than to be wise alone with danger and derision ? He that is dif- 
ferent in manners from them, ought not to live there, where the plague of 
corruption hath so prevailed as to infect all men with its contagion." — P. 177. 

In his book of Simoniacal Prelates^ he says, cap. 1 : — 

" The church is now become a shop of merchandise, or rather of robbery 
and rapine ; in which all the sacraments are exposed to sale. * * And, 
therefore, you see such men admitted to the priesthood and other holy orders, 
who are idiots, unlearned, and scarce able to read, though way wardly, ind 
without understanding one syllable after another, who know no more of Latin, 
tlian they do of Arabic, who, when they read, pray, or sing, know not whethei 
they bless God, or blaspheme him — men undiscipUned, unquiet, gluttons, 
drunkards, praters, vagabonds, lustful, bred up in luxury, and in one word, 
«dii, and ignorant." 

1 will not shock your ears by reading the passage which fol 
lows. In his book of The Corrupt State of the Churchy cap. 
lii, he tells us, 

" That she was defiled with the sink of all Vices ; and might be fitl y called 
ihe Church of Mdipiants : that the saying of tlie prophet was now verified 
ihal from the least ^ ' them to the greatest every one was given to cove4outn€$% 



166 THE JUSTIFi VATION OF 

Ihat from the prophet to the priest every ore dealt falsely, * * • ♦ V J ' 
preaches or declares the gospel ? Wh( , either by word or deed, shi>»>6 jx;^ 
way to Irte eternal ?" 

Speaking of the Pope, he says— 

"That by taking from the diocesans and patrons the liberty of presentation 
to their benefices, he had stocked th-e church with ignorant and wicked men. 
How great a number of expectants from tliat time came in, not from their 
studies or the schools, but from the plough and servile arts, to become parish 
priests, and obtain other benefices, who knew little more of the Latin, than 
the Arabic tongue ; who could not read, and, which is a shame to speak of, 
scarce knew Jl from J5, and yet their immorality was greater than their igno» 
ranee; for, being educated in idleness, without learning, they followed nothing 
but idleness, sports, banquetings, brawlings and vain talk : hence is it, that 
in all places we have so many ignorant, miserable, and wicked priests." — 
Cap. 13. 

In the next place, he taxes the cardinals with avarice, unclean- 
ness, simony, and other vices. He says, 

" That by their means it came to pass, that no man learned in the scrip 
tures ; no honest, just, and virtuous persons were advanced to high dignities ; 
but only ambitious persons, flatterers, buffoons, and men corrupted with all 
vices; so that they were wholly unlearned, or if they knew something of the 
imperial laws, or gainful sciences, they never thought of God's law, or of the 
spiritual learning, in which the people were to be instructed to life eternal — 
that if any person happened to condemn their covetousness and injustice, if he 
endeavoured by wholesome exhortations, and by preaching to gain souls, if he 
nieditated more on the laws of God, than those of men, presently every man's 
teeth were whet against him, and ready to bite him ; and they proclaimed him 
a fool, and one unworthy of the priesthood. So that now, (saith he) th« 
study of the scriptures, and the professor of divinity are become ridiculous to 
ail men." 

Of the Bishops : 

'* That in most diocesses, the rectors or the parish priests paid them a cer- 
tain price for keeping ***** =ic *. That no man was admitted 
into the clergy or sacred orders, or any ecclesiastical degree, without rewards, 
which, saith he, is intolerable; that being youths without beards, and scarce 
got from und^r the ferula, they obtained a bishopric, knowing as little of thai 
office, as of the mariner's vocation ; that by their filthy examples they led their 
fiocks into bye ways, which tended to their ruin." — Cap. 1 1, 12, 13. 

Again, 

" What should I speak, (saith he) of the learning of the priests, when it i& 
visible that scarce any of them can read ? they know not words, and much 
less things: he of them that prayeth, is a barbarian to himself If any man 
is idle and abhors labour, if he loves luxury, he gets now a days into the clergr^ 
and then presently he joins himself to the rest of the priests that are volup- 
tuous, and live according to Epicurus, rather than according to the laws of 
Christ."— Cap. 25. 

"Such (saith he) is the abundance of wicked men m all professions, that 
there is scarcfly one among a thousand, who sincerely doth what his profes- 
sion doth require ; if there be any sincere, chaste, sober, frugal person, in any 
college or convent, who doth not walk in the broad way, he is made a ridicu. 
lous fable to the rest, and is continually called an insolent, mad, and hypo- 
critical fellow ; so that many who would have been good, had they lived with 
good and honest men, are drawn by wicked company into their vices, lesi 
3iey should suffer the fore-mentio "ed r ;proaches among their companions."— 
Cap. 86. 



THE REFORMATION 157 

He then concludes with an apostrophe to the Roman churr.h— ^ 

•* What tliinkest thou of thine own prophecy, the revelations (£ St. John? 
dost thou not think they do at least, in part, belong to thee: thou hast not 
surely so wholly lost all shame as to deny this; look, therefore, into it, and 
read the damnation of the great whore sitting upon many waters, and there con- 
template thy famous facts, and future ruin^ — Declarat. defect. Virorum Ec( less. 

James de Paradise, of Cnartres, who wiote a little after the 
Council of Basil, says. 

They who have the presidency in councils on the Pope's behalf when they set 
ihal matters in the council make against their masters and them, what can be 
expected from them but that they will withstand the decrees of such councils 
with might and main, e\\herhy dissolving Xhem, or sowing dissensions in them; 
and so the thing shall remain unfinished, and wo be driven to return to the olc. 
wilderness of error and of ignorance. Every body knows this to be most true, 
unless it be some one happily who is not experienced in times past. The tra- 
gedy which was acted in our a^e in the council of Basil doth sufficiently prove 
it, as they knew well who have laid down the story before our eyes. — De Sept 
Btat. Ecclesiae. 1. 

Of the 16th century, in which the council of Trent was held, 
and more particularly of the proceedings there, the complaint5» 
are still more grievous. 

" Amongst most of the primate? of our religion, whose example the ignorant 
people ouglit to follow and be conformed to, there is," saith Picus Mirandula, 
"either none, or veryHttle service of God, no good life, no shame, no modesty. 
Justice is declined into hatred or favour, piety is almost turned into supersti- 
tion, and by all orders of men sin is so openly committed, that very often the 
virtue of the honest man is made his crime, and vice is honoured as a virtue 
by them who think the unheard of petulancy and long impunity of their vices 
to be as walls and enclosures to them." — Orat. ad Loen. X, et Concil Lat, 
habit. A. D. 1512, Open t. xx, p. 1S26. 

Staephylus, speaking of the destruction of the city of Rome, 
which happened A. D. 1527, observes — 

" Whence is it that this happened ? to ivit, because all flesh had corrupted its 
ways, we were all citizens and inhabitants not of the holy city of Rome, but 
of Babylon, that wicked city; of which that of the prophet Isaiah is fulfilled, 
* How IS the faithful city become an harlot.' Let no man think this prophecy 
hath been fulfilled already, in the destruction of Babylon or of Jerusalem. 
No ! future things were present to the prophet's eye, and this the prophet hath 
declared to us, saying, *the daughter of Zion shall be left desolate, as in the 
wasting of the enemy.' St. John doth in the Revelations tell us, the daughter 
of Zion is not Jerusalem but Rome ; and his description of her makes it plain. 
*For the woman which thou sawest (saith he) is that great city which hath 
dominion over the kings of the earth,' that is spiritual dominion. She sits, 
saith he upon seven hills, which properly agrees to Rome, which, upon this 
account, is styled Septicollis. She is full, saith he, of the names of blasphemy 
— she is the mother of uncleanness, fornications, and abominations, which are 
in the earth ; than which words no more particular demonstration of the city can 
be requisite, seeing these iniquities do almost generally reign, yet here they 
have their seat and empire. Orat. habit, ad auditores Rotae IVIaii 15, A. D* 

I might adduce many other quotations, but I shall bring tot- 
ward only two more. Johannes de Eych, Episcopus Eystatensis, 
speaking of the corruption of the times of the Reformation, says 

14 



158 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

" The perverted manners by which almost all the ecclesiastical oi^er u 
•tained, so cloud the senses of all, that not only they do not perceive the word 
of truth with their ears, but even despisinij amendment of life, they resist then 
own salvation even with arms." — Prima ^pistola, P. M. 2. 

Franciscas de Victoria, observes, that, 

" The Church could neither bear her disorders nor their remedies." — Ec 
clesia nee mala sua, nee remedia, ferre posse. — Prelect 4, prop. 23. 

In addition to these testimonies from Roman Catholic authori- 
ties, I beg leave to observe, that at the time of the Reformation 
as my friend is well aware, there was an universal cry for a 

REFORMATION OF ABUSES. 

I am now come to my second point, namely, the unscriptural 
nature of the peculiar doctrines of the church of Rome. 
First, as to Tradition. — 

[Here Mr. Maguire interrupted Mr. Pope. I came here to 
defend three points of my religious creed. I attack but three of 
your^s. I will not allow you to go into others. 

Mr, Pope replied, that the question before them was the jus- 
tification of the Reformation ; and in order to justify it, it was 
necessary for him to enter briefly into the doctrines of the church 
of Rome. 

Mr. Maguire. You should defend yourself, and not attack 
me. I appeal to the written regulations. 

Mr. Pope. I stand on my defence, and am to show that the 
reformers were justified in separating from the church of Rome ; 
from the state of that church, both with regard to morals ant 
doctrine. 

Mr. Maguire appealed to the chair : and after a consultation. 
Mr. Lawless stated the opinion of the chair, namely, that Mr. 
Pope had a right to state whatever reasons occurred to his judg- 
ment, as having called for the Reformation, and on the other 
hand that Mr. Maguire had a right to prove the scriptural cha- 
racter of the doctrines opposed, in order to show, that the 
Rt^formation was not called for on that account.] 

Mr. Pope resumed. — Gentlemen, I shall take a rapid view 
oi the doctrines of the church of Rome, in order to prove that 
di5 reformers were justified in separating from her communion 
in that ground. 

TRADITION, 

The church of Rome says — 

"All saving truth not being contained in the holy scripture, but partly m 
the scripture, and partly in unwritten traditions; scripture and tradition are 
to be received and venerated with like piety and reverence, " pari pietatii 
afiectv ac revorentia." — Concil Trident Seas. 4, Decret de can. Script 



THE REFORMATION. 159 

The Douay Bible says — 

"You shall not. add lo the word that I speak to you." — Deutir ch. 2. 

** Every word of God is fire-tried ; add not any thing to his words, lest thov 
be reproved and found a liar." — Prov. xxx ch. 5, 6. 

" For I testify to every one that heareth the words of the prophecy of this 
book : If any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto hitr thf 
pia=rues written in this book." — Apoc. xxii ch. 18. 

"The holy scriptures can instruct thee to salvation by the faith which »s iir 
Christ Jesus : all scripture inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to remove, 
to correct, to instruct in justice : that the man of God may be perfect, furnished 
to every good work." — 2 Tim. iii ch. 15, 17. 

" You have made void the commandment of God for your tradition.'' — 
Matt XV ch. 6. 

I find, therefore, that tradition is condemned, and that scrip- 
ture is able " to instruct unto salvation, to teach, to reprove, to 
correct, and to instruct in justice, that the man of God may be 
perfect, furnished to every good work." I am desirous of knovv^- 
ing, if the scriptures be imperfect, by what process they can 
make a man perfect in every good work ? 

READING THE SCRIPTURES. 

The church of Rome intimate, that it is not for the people to 
read the sacred scriptures — Indiscriminata lectio sacrae scrip- 
turfB interdicte est — and her practice abundantly confirms the 
information. Cone. Trid. Sess. 4, Uecret. de can. Scrip : Ind. 
lib. prohib. Reg. 4. 

The Douay Bible says — 

" Come near, ye Gentiles, and hear, and hearken ye people: let the earth 
hear, and all that is therein ; the world, and every thing that cometh fortlr 
of it." — Isaiah, xxxiv, 1. 

And adds in the 16th verse — 

" Search te diligently in the book of the Lord and read." 

" Search the scriptures." — John, v, 39. 

Our next subject is 

PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 

Certainly my friend has thrown new light on the extent to 
which the church of Rome permits the exercise of private judg- 
ment : however, I cannot avoid thinking, that the doctrine of the 
church is in substance this — believe implicitly what tbe church 
tells you. 

The Douay Bible says, 

" Prove all things ; hold fast that which is good." — 1 Thess. v, 21. 
" Try the spirits, if they be of God." — 1 John, iv, 1, 

IMAGE VTORSHIP. 

" It is latofid to express any person of the most holy Trinity by certain sifpti 
none being so rude as to think that the divinity is expressed by that image, 
But let the pastors teach that by then, are declared some properties or actiont 
which are attributed to God. The images and relics of Christ and the sainlf 



160 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

are to be duly honoured and venerated ; and in this vehefatibn, those ani 
Venerated which are represented by them.'- — Trent Catech. part iii, ch. S» p, 
302, Dub. 1816. Cone. Trid. Sess. 25, de Invocat. 

The Douay Bible says — 

" Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven thing, nor the likeness of anj 
thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things thai 
are in the waters under the earth ; thou shalt not adore them nor serve them." 
— Exod. XX, 4, 5 ; See Deut. iv, 15, 16. Acts, xvii, 29. 

All I ask the church of Rome to do is this — to write the 2nd 
commandment under every image and picture, which are objects 
of worship ; and the common sense of the votaries of the church 
of Rome will rise up and declare, that such a practice is directly 
opposed to the Word of God. 

MEDIATORS, 

The church of Rome says, 

*' There are other mediators of intercession in heaven besiaes Jesus Chnsl; 
such as angels and saints and especially, the Virgin Mary, who is the mothei 
of mercy and advocatress of the faithful ; and it is good and profitable to in- 
voke them, and to have recourse to their prayers and help." — Cone. Tid. Sess 
25, de Invocat &c. 

The Douay Bible says — 

"Jesus saith to him, I am the truth and the life; no man cometh to the 
Father but by me." — John, xiv, 6, see 13th verse. 

" There is ONE Mediator of God and man, the man Christ Jesus." — 
1 Tim. ii, 5. 

" Jesus is able also to save for ever them that come to God by him, always 
living to make intercession for us." — Hebrews, vii, 25. 

We have already had the subject of purgatory brought before 
us ; and I am inclined to think, that some who believed impHcitly 
in that doctrine, are shaken in the implicit character of theii 
faith in it. 

GOOD WORKS. 

A canon of the church of Rome, quoted on a fornjer day, 
may be thus condensed — 

"The good works of justified persons are truly and properly meritorioui 
and duly worthy of eternal life."— Cone. Trid. Sess. 6, cap. 16, can. 32. 

The Douay Bible says, 

"By grace you are saved througn faith, and that not of yourselves, foi \\ .'§ 
the gift of Goa; not oficm^ks, that no man may glory." — Eph. ii ch. 8. 

"The wages of sin is death, but the grace of God life everlasting in Chri«| 
lesiis our Lord." 

Or more plainly, 

"The gift of God is eternai life, through Jesus Christ our Lord.'*- 
Rom. vi, 23. 

"When you have done all things haX are commanded you, say: we an 
miprtfitable servants ; we have done that which we ought to do." — Luke 
KVii, 10. 



THE REFORMATION. 161 

I need not now speak on transubstantiatic n- -that %^l be oui 
subject of discussion to-n)orrow, you will then see that thai 
doctrine can obtain no support from Holy Writ. 

I pray you to judge from this brief contrast, between the 
doctrines of the church of Rome and those of the Bible, whether 
the reformers were not called upon to separate from such a 
ci>'n»nunion. 

But my quarrel with the church of Rome, like that of the 
f formers, is touching that grand tenet which she has labour#^d 
o set aside, justification by faith — acceptance at the bar of God 
m dependance solely on the atoning blood of the Saviour. 1 
trace up the principal errors of the church of Rome to ignorance 
or rejection of this fundamental article of the Christian religion. 
Would she, for instance, hold that good works entitle to eternal 
lite, if she believed that •* by the deeds of the law no flesh could 
be justified," (Rom. iii, 20,) and that the sinner could be saved 
only by the obedience unto death of the Lord Jesus Christ? 
How could the church of Rome maintain the doctrine of supere- 
rogation, if she acknowledged that " every mouth is shut and the 
whole world brought in guilty before God," (Rom. iii, 19,) and 
that "cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written 
in the book of the law to do them?" — (Gal. iii, 10.) Did sl>?3 
believe the sacrifice of Christ to be an all-suiBcient atonemer*,, 
would she think a purgatorial fire necessary? If she knew thu< 
the blood of Christ cleanseth from all sin, would she hold that 
the soul stands in need of an additional purgation? Could sKf» 
for a moment entertain the notion of repeating the sacrifice of 
Christ, if He w^ere acknowledged by her as having made ]fy 
"one oblation of himself once for all," an end of sin, reconcile »► 
tion for iniquity, and as having brought in everlasting righteoi ^ 
ness? This grand doctrine the reformers proclaimed, and for 
the maintaining of it they stood out from the church of Rome. 
Luther deemed it the " articulus stantis vel cadentis Ecclesiae.'^ 
and I say, let this doctrine be preached in all its fulness, and w«» 
shall plant a lever beneath the fortrcvsses of Babylon ; and soon 
shall we hear her sentence issuing from the throne of the Eter« 
nal, " Down with her, down with her, even to the ground." 

Such are the reasons upon which I vindicate the Reformation 
It is not my intention to justify every act of the reformers. If 
i should wish to recriminate, Mr. Maguire nmy be assured, that 
I have it in my power, in turn, to place in the most awful point 
of view, the characters of those who are recognized as the heads 
of the church of Rome. There is, however, this wide distinc- 
tion — I do not acknf)wledge Luther as the head of my church : 
Christ, the Lord over all, is the head of his mystical body ; 1 
call no man master in the strict sense of the t<rm, and therefore 

14* 



162 niE JUSTIFICATION OF 

am not bound to follow men only so far as they follow Chrisl^ 
much less am 1 called upon to justify every oct in the history ol 
their lives. These are the two grounds, on which I would justify 
the separation from the church of Rome, which took place in 
the sixteenth Century : — first, the.moral condition of the church oj 
Rome — and secondly, the unscriptural character of her doctrines 

Mr. Maguire. — Before I proceed further, I beg leave here 
to enter my solemn protest agamst the decision of the Chair, 
and the line of conduct which has been adopted towards me. 
I publicly and solemnly protest against it. It is an obvious and 
complete departure from the understanding and principles upon 
which this discussion was commenced. Before I came to Dub- 
lin, I had expressly agreed and stipulated with Mr. Pope, that 
he should select any three articles of the Catholic doctrine which 
he pleased, for attack — that I should select three points against 
hi/n, and that we should thus act the parts of plaintiff and de- 
fendant reciprocally. I appeal to the candour of my Protestant 
auditors, if this were not the express stipulation upon the faith 
of which I agreed to meet Mr. Pope in this public controversial 
discussion. One of the points which I selected against Mr. 
Pope, was a justification of the Protestant Reformation. I 
admit he was free to bring forward every circumstance which he 
could consistently urge in defence of that schism. But is he, 
on this occasion, instead of confining himself to that single 
point, to level his attacks against all and every one of the doc- 
trines of the Catholic church 1 Am I, in the short period allotted 
to me, expected to be able to defend all the doctrines of my 
church, and to repel all the calumnies and misrepresentations 
which Mr. Pope may bring forward against her. I can only 
say that my confidence has been abused — that I have been any 
thing but well treated. I shall, however, proceed to rebut the 
scandalous charges advanced by Mr. Pope, and which he has 
grounded upon the authority of Protestant historians exclusively, 
with the exception of Baronius and Bellarmine, and upon the 
testimony of historians, be it observed, deserving of little credit 
upon this particular subject. I must also remark that instead 
of there being only three points on each side for attack an(^ 
defence, mutually, 1 have only three points at present, to urge 
against Mr. Pope, while he has put me on my defence for fifteen 
or twenty. Before I proceed to defend the articles of my creed 
against the rigmarole attack which has been levelled at the/n by 
ny opponent, I shall advert to one or two facts which it may 
be as well for you to bear in memory. 

Mr. Pope has lot at all answered my arguments resprctiiig 
tlie proofs of the authenticity, integrity, and inspiration of th« 



THE REFORMATION. 163 

SHcred scriptures. With regard to the Sixtine eduion, I deny 
that but two copies of it are in existence. I have here the Six- 
tine and Clementine editions. A Roman Catholic clergyman 
of this city purchased a copy of it exposed publicly to sale in 
the city of Rome. I will admit that Clement did not wish that 
that edition of the Bible should be circulated. Orders had been 
giv( n by the council of Trent that a pure and perfect edition of 
the Latin Vulgate, " quam emendatissime," should be prepared 
oy learned men under the sanction of the sovereign pontiff. 
Many verbal corruptions were to be found in the edition then 
in common use, arising either from the neglect of the copyists, 
or from the ignorance of those who endeavoured to purify the 
text. Now Sixtus Quintus had previously taken upon him not 
only to make out a pure copy of the Bible, but to introduce 
changes from the original Hebrew and Greek editions, which, 
in the opinions of St. Jerome, St. xiugustin, and Dr. Wall, a 
Protestant bishop, were not so pure as the old Latin and Italian 
translations. When Clement perused the edition of Sixtus, he 
ordered that it should be purified according to the ancient Latin 
and Italian translations. But I defy any man to point out a 
substantial difference between the Clementine and Sixtine 
editions. It is curious, too, that in the preface to the Sixtine 
edition, that preface from which Mr. Pope quoted with such 
triumph the phrase " ne in minima particula^^^ it is pronounced 
lawful to make verbal amendments and corrections, but upon 
condition that they shall be introduced into the text, and not put 
in the margin, ^^ad offensionem populi vitandam,^^ — lest the people 
should be scandalized, not distinguishing between verbal and 
substantial alterations. The ne in minima particular it is obvious 
relates to matters of faith. 

Mr. Pope asserted that masses were said for the rich and not 
for the poor. I have the Missal here on the table, and by refer- 
ring to it, Mr. Pope will find that mass is offered up for all the 
faithful, living and dead, without any reservation whatever. In 
the sacrifice of the mass we pray for all Christians, for all infidels, 
heretics, schismatics — nay, for Mr. Pope himself. The charge 
of taking money comes with a bad grace from the other side. 
There is a Protestant clergyman in this city, who is called 
chaplain to the Virgin Mary ; his income amounts to jC300 a 
year, and if the leases were out, it would average JC3,000 per 
annum. This was bequeathed, some centuries ago, in order to 
have masses said for the departed ; the masses are not said, but 
the Protestant parson pockets the money. 

The important fact has been established of Mr. Pope's igno- 
rance of the Bible. Though he has told us he has made the 
scriptures his continual study, and though he professed a thorough 



'64 THE JUiTlFICATION OF 

acquaintance, both with the Protestant and Catholic versions, ha 
acknowledged his ignorance on Saturday of the following text : 
" And yet man knowelh not whether he be worthy of love or hatred." 
I can inform him that it is to be found in the ninth chapter ol 
Ecclesiastes. Between the Protestant and Catholic versions of 
this text, there is no substantial difference as k runs thus in th« 
Protestant Bible — *' No man knoweth either love or hatred, by 
all that is before him.'' — Mr. Pope talked of the Catholic church 
teaching that all truths are not contained in scripture. I have 
already proved, that all truths are not contained in the scriptures; 
and I challenge Mr. Pope to produce proofs from scripture foi 
five articles of the Protestant creed. But I should recollect 
that he throws the Protestant church entirely overboard. 1 beg 
leave to ask him, does he consider the existence of a church at 
all absolutely necessary, under the Christian dispensation ? He 
holds, it appears, the opinion of justification by faith only. What 
does St. Paul say? 

" If I should have all faith, so that I could move mountains, and have not 
charity I am nothing." — 1 Cor. xiii, 2. 

There is i>n example of faith without charity. St. James says, 

" What shall it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but hath not 
works ? Shall faith be able to save him? ii, 14. "For as the body without 
the spirit is dead ; so also faith without works is dead." — Ibid. 26. 

If every thing be contained in the scriptures, why has not Mr. 
Pope shown me texts to prove the procession of the Holy Ghost 
— baptism, with the sign of the cross, &c. Why was it decreed 
by the Apostles, at the council held in Jerusalem, that it appeared 
good to them to abstain from all blood ? I believe Mr. Pope 
has no objection to take some good gravy occasionally. In 
doing so, he goes in opposition to a positive command of the 
Apostles. I have produced a commandment of our Saviour foi 
washing the feet, which taken juxta tenorem verborum, is as posi- 
tive a commandment as ^ny to be found in scripture. Mr. Pope 
has endeavoured to show, that this was applicable to hot coun • 
tries, as if the commandments of the Lord were to be adopted 
according to the different temperatures of difl^erent countries, 
and not applied to all indiscriminately. Is it not obvious to 
common sense, that Christ intended his commandments should 
be observed in cold as well as in hot countries ? I called on 
my opponent to produce proofs from scripture, authorizmg ths 
baptism of infants. But I should recollect that he throws bap- 
tism overboard. He adheres to justification by faith only. 1 
wou:"a agree fully in the dogma with him if the word *' only*' 
were removed. For what, I would ask, did God give free-will 
to man? And why did our blessed Redeemer enjoin the keep 
ing of the commardments as a condition for salvation? 



THE REFORMATION. 165 

"But if thot vil. enter into life, keep the comriandments,"- -Matt 
Dhap. xiv, 17. 

I now come to Mr. Pope's rule of faith. He will say, as he 
has said, that it is contained in the holy scriptures aloM. I beg 
tc ask my opponent, if the scriptures alone be his rule of faith, 
is it not necessary for us to examine all the inspired books which 
have been written ] Does he believe it necessary to know the 
whole Bible, or a portion of it, for salvation 1 If it be only 
lecessary to know a portion of the Bible, I call upon him to 
produce his authority from scripture for that belief. 

Mr. Pope. — It may be well to read and know the whole 
scriptures, if a person have the opportunity ; but I believe that a 
rxian can be saved without reading the whole Bible. 

Mr. Maguire. — Show me a text to justify that belief? 

Mr. Pope. — When the Apostle was asked, what shall I do tc 
b ) saved I he answered — " Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, 
and thou shalt be saved." Acts, xvi, 31. At one period, only 
the Old Testament was written. 

Mr. Maguire. — When it only was written, no person was 
called upon to found his sole rule of faith upon it. 

Mr. Pope. — I conceive if a person have the opportunity, it is 
right to know all the scriptures. But a person can be saved 
without knowing the whole volume. 

Mr. Maguire. — So, if a person read the Old Testament 
merely, and is not acquainted with the New Testament, he may 
be saved 1 

Mr. Pope. — I will make no such concession. 

Mr. Maguire. — I would much rather you would give us texts 
of scripture, and not mere assertion. I never heard of so loose 
a doctrine. I shall now reduce Mr. Pope to a dilemma. — If 
the scriptures alone be his rule of faith, I ask is it not necessary, 
in that case, to examine all the canonical books that have been 
written 1 Now, all the canonical books that have been written, 
are not to be found in any part of the known world. God would 
Lave preserved all the inspired writings, had he intended that 
the scriptures alone should be the rule of our faith ; but God has 
not preserved all the inspired books of scripture, for not less 
than twenty have perished ; therefore God did not intend them 
as the only rule of faith — Mr. Pope must admit, according to his 
principles, that it is necessary to examine all the canonical 
books — for if not, how could he ascertain his rule of faith ? there 



(66 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

might happen to be in these books, which are lost, or which he 
should pass over, texts opposed to his doctrine, and which per- 
haps expressly taught that the rule of faith was not in the scrip- 
tures alone. If, on the other hand, Mr. Pope shall contend that 
it is only necessary to know a portion of the Bible, I call upon 
him to prove that to me by a positive text of scripture. 

Now, again, either all the inspired books that have been 
written are necessary to form the rule of our faith, or only r part 
is necessary. If Mr. Pope shall assert that all are necessary, 
then the scriptures are no rule of faith, since all the scriptures 
are not to be found. But if Mr. Pope say, that only apart is 
necessary, let him produce a text of s<jripture to prove that as 
we cannot take his bare word on matters of such importance ; but 
I defy Mr. Popo to produce any such text, therefore the scripture 
cannot be the sole rule of faith. A living authority must be left 
to direct and decide on matters of controversy. 

I shall now show you that we have not all the scriptures. Im 
the book of Nr.mbers, chap, xxi, 14, we read thus : 
"It is said in the book of the wars of the Lord." 

Where is that book ? Gone. 

In the third book of Kings, (which Protestants call the first) 
Chron. iv, 32, we read that 

"Solomon spoke three thousand proTerbs," and "his canticles were 8 
thousand and five." 

W^here are these ? What a small portion of them we have noi/ 
In the second book of Chronicles, ix, 29, it is said — 

"Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, are they not written in 
the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah, and in tJie 
vision of Iddo." 

Where are all those books 1 

The first book of Chronicles concludes with these words, 

" Name the acts of David the king, first and last, behold be they not written 
in the book of Samuel the seer, and in the book of Nathan the prophet, and 
in the book of Gad the seer?" 

All those prophecies are lost. 

In St. Paul's epistle to the Colossians he commands them to 
read in the church the epistle to the Laodiceans — Where is that 
epistle ] Lost. 

In St. Ta-uVs first epistle to the Corinthians, v, 9, he says, 
" I wrote to you an epistle." 

Where is the epistle which St. Paul wrote to them before the 
epistle which is now called ^rs/ ? It is not in existence. So 
tere we find two epistles of St. Paul lost. 

St. Matthew (cind here I may remark that the original Hebren 
gospel of St. Matthew is quite lost. I should like to kno^^ \mdei 



THE REFORMATION. 167 

•uch circumstances, how a Protestant can found his faitb 
upon the gospel of St. JMattheiv, which is losfy unless he depena 
upon the authority of an infallible translator) — St. Matthew, I say, 
xxvii, 9, cites words as spoken by the prophet Jeremy, which 
are not to be found in any part of Jeremy now extant. Where- 
fore, part of Jeremy the prophet is lost, as Cotrzein in this place 
proves out of 2 Chron. xxxv, 20. St. Matthew also, ii, 23, says» 
" It was spoken by the prophets he shall be called a Nazaiene." 
The books of the prophets who spoke thus have also perished 
for we find Christ never called a Nazarene in all the prophets' 
books at present extant St. Chrysostom on this place, (Homil. 
ix, in Matt, i,) says, 

" Many of the prophetical monuments have perished ; for the Jews being 
careless, and not only careless, but also impious, they have carelessly lost 
some of these monuments; others, they have partly burnt, partly torn in 
pieces." 

Here we find twenty books of scripture lost. Will Mr. Pope 
show that none of those lost books are necessary, when he ac- 
knowleges no church, and asserts that the Bible is his sole rule 
of faith] Mr. Pope talks much about his rule of faith, and yet 
he cannot tell where it is to be found. If he say that the scrip- 
tures are not to be had — that a portion of scripture is only 
necessary for salvation, let him produce to me a positive text 
of scripture to that effect — for I allow nothing but -d positive text 
of scripture to decide upon such a vitally important point. ) 
challenge him to show where his sole rule of faith is to be found 
But he cannot produce any text to prove that all the scripture* 
are not necessary, or that a portion of them is sufficient, f«yr 
salvation. Mr. Pope has had recourse to the Fathers to pro^ f» 
the authenticity of scripture, though he rejected their authority 
when quoted by me in support of the doctrine of purgatory. 

I have shown from seventeen holy Fathers down to the sixth 
i^entury, that the doctrine of purgatory was retained and professed 
throughout the Catholic church. He has quoted St. Jerome in 
proof of the authority and authenticity of the sacred scriptures. — 
But when I quote Jerome and the other Fathers in support of 
the doctrine of purgatory, they are very consistently rejected by 
Mr. Pope. He talked of Hebrew. I venture to say he is un- 
acquainted with the Hebrew points. He spoke of the original 
Hebrew copies. Would it not be necessary for the ignorant 
Protestant, according to the principles of Mr. Pope to compare 
all the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin copies of the scriptures, before 
he could be satisfied of their inspiration ? All the proofs which 
Mr. Pope has advanced, of the inspiration of the sacred scrip- 
tures, rest upon human authority, and no act of faith can be 
^uih upon such a foundatioi. Mr. Pope certainly spoke of gm 



168 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

internal evidence. Now, if that be admitted, it mus be admitted 
as a first principle. It is denied, and ridiculed by the learned 
Chilling worth, a Protestant divine, who, in reply to the words 
of his adversary, " That the divinity of a writing cannot be 
known by itself alone, but by some extrinsic authority," says, 
This you need not pro%K^for no wise man denies t7." 

If it were a first principle and self-evident, as Mr. Pope would 
nave it, who would deny it? The truth of first principles no 
rational man ever doubted. But millions of Christians deny 
the doctrine of internal evidence. The Arians, the Manichaeans, 
the Marcionists, &c, all denied internal evidence. The Catholics 
throughout the whole world for eighteen hunoreu years, ccnild 
not discover this inward lights but, on the contrary, have loudiv 
protested against the doctrine of internal illumination, since that 
new system has been broached. It cannot, therefore, be a first 
principle, which Chillingworth himself and millions of Christians 
unequivocally denied. // is only a foolish and visionary scheme* 
to which those who have no better resort^ to prove the inspiration of 
the sacred scriptures. 

Mr. Pope. — Gentlemen — I need scarcely observe, that my 
friend on the opposite side of the table has been speaking on the 
subject which belonged to the second day of the meeting. Mr. 
Maguire has protested against the line of our present proceeding. 
He has spoken much of obedience to authority ; and, surely, 
when the chairmen decided, he was bound, according to his own 
principles, to bow to their decision. I submit to every man of 
common sense, whether the line of argument, adopted by me on 
this occasion, was not perfectly justifiable — namely, to show 
that the peculiar doctrines, held by the church of Rome, were 
anti-scriptural, and that the Reformers were, in consequence, 
called upon to separate from her communion. How could this 
charge have been substantiated without the consideration of the 
doctrines themselves? My friend should remember, that not 
satisfied with the abstract question of private judgment for the 
second day, he selected two or three other topics of debate — 
the right of private judgment, to pronounce upon the canonicity, 
integrity, authenticity^ and interpretation of the holy scriptures. 
The second day was the time set apart for the consideration of 
those subjects. My friend seemed to state, that he held in his 
hand the Sixtine edition of the Vulgate, but I say, that the edition 
which he produced, is the Clementine. 

[Here Mr. Maguire called upon Mr. O'Reilly, into whose 
aands he said that he had given the Sixtine copy for the purpoM 
»f bringing it to the meeting.] 



THE REFORMATION. 169 

Mr. Pope. — I beg to remark, that so great is the scarcity of 
the Sixtine Bible, that the Jesuit Fisher not merely denied that 
any were in existence, but stated, that Sixtus V, had not pub- 
lished any edition of the Vulgate whatever ! Masses, we arc 
told, are generally offered for rich and poor : but, if they be 
offered in this general way, why, I would ask, why should the 
Priests take money specially from the rich ? My friend brought 
forward a passage, " Faith without charity is dead." The 
Apostles, I admit, speak of such a faith ; but it was merely suel' 
a?5 enabled an individual to work miracles, and yet left him imin- 
flunnced by the grace of God. The genuine faith of God's 
people '* purifies the heart," (Acts xv, 9,) works by love, (Gal. 
V, G,) and overcomes the world (1 John v, 4,) enabling the 
Christian to act in consistency with his profession, and is there- 
fore the grand germ of spiritual life, and the parent of Christian 
morahty. Although the difference may appear trivial between 
being justified by faith, and by faith alone^ in truth the distinction 
is most important. If the scriptures, I am asked, be the only 
rule of faith, are we not then obliged to be acquainted with all 
the scriptures, lest one part should contradict another. I meet 
the question, and say, God never contradicts himself; he never 
varies, but is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever : that 
which God speaks once, as to moral truth, is eternal and immu- 
table. My friend has observed, that if all the scriptures need 
not be examined, then all are not necessary, I answer, that it 
is the duty of all men, if they have opportunity, to read all the 
scriptures. Yet, provided they place their hopes on Christ, 
(and in order to do so, they need the influence of the Holy 
f?pirit) they will be accepted through him at the bar of God, 
i lOugh they may not have read every part of the sacred volume. 
lily friend has spoken about sundry books that have been lost, 
which, he says, formed part of the inspired records, and has 
directed our attention to passages of the Bible, which allude to 
other writings. But the onus rests on him, before his argument 
can carry any weight, to prove that the books of which he speaks, 
ever belonged to the sacred canon — that they were the dictates 
of inspiration, and not portions of mere ordinary history, which 
recorded some particulars that might not have been mentioned 
in the canonical writings. I would also beg to observe, that 
my friend believes in tradition and infalhbility. Roman Catholic 
Divines, assuming that the Jewish church was infaUible, are in 
the habit of arguing from analogy, that the church of Rome is 
gifted with unerring authority. Taking Mr. Maguire on this 
ground, I would a^k, what was the use of infallibility to the 
Jewish church, if it could not succeed in \)reserving the canon 
of the Old Testament, perfect and entire Further — the onus 



170 Tim: JUSTIFICATION OF 

rests on him to show, that either the written tra'iitiop, or *h« 
viva voce exposition of the church of Rome, has ^uppUed thd 
portion which, Mr. Maguire says, has been lo?5t, or perfectly 
accords with it. Now I take the sacred scriptures which we 
possess, and with them I contrast the traditions of the Roman 
Catholic church, and finding that they are in opposition to the 
oracles of truth, I conclude that they are not of God ; for God 
cannot contradict himself. My friend did not like that I should 
refer to the Fathers on the canonicity and authenticity of the 
ocriptures. I admit their authority as credible testimony — but 
not as infallible. We must be convinced, that when the scrip- 
tures are quoted by very ancient writers, they must at least have 
been coeval with the authors who cite passages from them. I 
appeal to the Fathers, to prove by their historical evidence the 
authenticity of the scriptures. This kind of evidence in support 
of the scriptures, is much more powerful than that in favour of 
any other ancient record. It matters not very much for my 
argument, as to the antiquity of the sacred volume, whether the 
character of the Fathers who quote from it, be good or evil. 
Mr. Maguire has allowed the authority of the Fathers, as faith- 
ful witnesses. 

My friend on the opposite side has scouted the idea of in- 
ternal evidence. If God has said, that his invisible attribul es 
are to be discerned by his works. 

" For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are ciea\ry 
seen, being understood by the things that are made, his eternal power also 
and divinity." — Rom. i, 20. 

And if it be true that " God has magnified his word above all 
his name," (Ps. cxxxviii, 2,) may we not expect that the Deity 
has stamped, in an especial manner, upon this page of Revela- 
tion, the impress of his own divine character? Mr. Maguire 
has observed, that, according to my showing, God has not 
provided for the spiritual wants of all mankind. I return the 
argument — is not the poor man, according to his principles, in 
a worse condition than he would be, according to mine ? Is 
the poor man to have recourse to councils and Fathers 1 Again 
I stand on firmer ground. Mr. Maguire, in order to prove the 
truth of the Bible, must, according to his principles, first prove 
the authority of the church, and refer the poor man to innumer- 
able folios. I have only to preach the Gospel, and to put the 
sacred scriptures into the hands of those whom I address, at the 
same time adding, if necessary, some arguments in support of 
their internal evidence. One reason which may convince every 
unprejudiced mind that God intended his word to rest for support 
principally upon internal evidence, is the fact, that few would be 
abl3 to examine the general proofs in support of the ir spired 



THE REFORMATION. 17l 

roluMe. God has chosen many of the poor of this world to be 
bright gems in the Saviour's diadem ; and when we know that 
the great bulk of mankind are doomed to labour, the fact fur- 
nishes us with a presumptive argument in favour of the proofs, 
which rest on internal evidence, as being open to every indi- 
vidual who seriously examines the sacred oracles. My fiien(^ 
has said, that I was afraid of the Fathers in reference to purga- 
tory — permit me to say, that was I not afraid to meet him on the 
grouTids of the Fathers ; I had various other quotations from 
their writings ; And here allow me to observe, that my opponent 
qno>.d a passage from Cyprian's letter to Antonian — " It is one 
thi.ig to be waiting for pardon, another to attain glory," &c, &c. 
It has nothing to do with purgatory. The church had relaxed 
some penitential censures against those who had fallen in per- 
secution ; and St. Cyprian was defending this measure, and 
proving that the state of the martyrs entering at once into ^\oYy 
was so much superior to the miseries of the lapsed, who were 
anxiously expecting re-admission into the church, and must feel 
anxiety about a future state, that there was no danger to be 
anticipated from the relaxation — this he shows by adding "it is 
one thing to expect with anxiety the judgment of the Lord in the 
day of judgment — another to be crowned by the Lord." Ri- 
galtius, a Roman Catholic commentator, gives this explan^iiion. 
Further, in reference to the Fathers. Most of the quotations 
adduced by Mr. Maguire do not, I imagine, support the doctrine 
of purgatory : they refer to oblations for the dead ; but those 
oblations for the dead were not offered for souls in purgatory. 
In the primhive church a practice existed of making thank€'. 
givings and offerings for those who had departed in the faith. 
As Mr. Maguire has quoted a passage from Sir Edwin Sandys, 
he can have no objection to my reading an extract or two from 
the same author. Sir Edwin gives us the following general 
view of the church of Rome, p. 35 : — 

" This being the main ground work of their policy ; and the general meana 
to build and establish it in the minds of all men ; the particular ways they hold 
to ravish all affections, and to fit each humor (which, their jurisdiction and 
power being but persuasive and voluntary, they principally regard), are well 
nigh infinite ; there being not any thing either sacred or profane, no virtue 
nor vice almost, no things of how contrary condition soever; wtiich they 
make not in some sort to serve that turn ; that each fancy may be satisfied, 
and each appetite find what to feed on. Whatsover either wealth can sway 
with the lovers, or voluntary poverty with the despisers, of the world ; what 
honour with the ambitious ; what obedience with the huuible ; what great 
employment with stirring and mettled spirits; what perpetual quiet with 
heavy and restive bodies; what content the pleasant nature can take in 
pastimes and jollity ; what contrariwise the austere mind in discipline and 
rigour; what love either chastity can raise in the pure, or voluptuousness in 
the dissolute ; what allurements are in knowledge to draw the conttmplative, 
dr in actions a" state to possess the practic dispositions, what with the 



1/2 THE JUStl^ICATION OF 

hopefw orcrogative of reward can work ; what errors, doubts, and dangen 
with til. fearful ; what change of vows wfth the rash, of estate with the incon- 
stant; t/hat pardons with the faulty, or suppHes with the defective; what 
iniradcj> with the credulous; what visions with the fantastical; what gor- 
geournt is of shows with the vulgar and simple ; what multitude ofceremoniea 
(\'ith tht superstitous and ignorant; what prayer with the devout, what with 
the chaiitable works of piety; what rules of higher perfection with elevated 
affections ; what dispensing of breach of all rules with men of lawless condi- 
toP6: in sum, what thing soever can prevail with any man either for himself 
tt) j^ursue, or at least- wise to love, reverence, or honour m another (for even 
therein also man's nature receiveth great satisfaction), the same is found with 
Ihem, not as in other places of the world, by casuality blended without order, 
aiid of i]l3cessity, but sorted in great part into several professions, counte- 
nanced with reputation, honoured with prerogatives, facilitated with provisions, 
and yearly maintenance, and either (as the better things) advanced Mith 
expectation of reward, or borne with, how bad soever, with sweet and silent 
permission. What pomp, what riot, to that of their cardinals? what severity 
of life comparable to their hermits and capuchins? who wealthier than their 
prelates? who poorer by vow and profession than their mendicants? On 
the one side of the street a cloister of virgins, on the other a sty of courtezans 
with public toleration ; this day all in masks, with all looseness and foolery: 
to-morrow all In processions, whipping themselves till the blood follow; on 
one door an excommunication, throwing to hell all transgressors : on another 
a jubilee, or full discharge from all transgressions. \Vho learneder in all 
kind of sciences than their Jesuits? What thing more ignorant than their 
ordinary mass-priests? What prince so able to prefer his servants and 
followers as the Pope, and in so great multitude? Who able to take deeper 
or readier revenge on his enemies? What pride equal unto his, making 
kings kiss his pantofle? what humility greater than his, shriving himseii 
daily on his knees to an ordinary priest? W ho difficulter in despatch of 
causes to the greatest ? who easier in giving audience to the meanest? Where 
greater rigour in the world in acting the observation of the church laws? 
where less care or conscience of the commandments of God ? To taste flesh 
on a Friday, where suspicion might fasten, were a matter for the inquisition ; 
whereas, on the other side, the Sunday is one of their greatest market-days. 
To conclude: never state, never governm.ent in the world so strangely com- 
p».cted of infinite contrarieties^ all tending to entertain the several humours 
(i all men, and to w^ork what kind of effects soever they shall desire; where 
ii^our and remissness, cnielty and lenity, are so combined, that, with neglect 
^i/the church, to stir aught is a sin unpardonable ; whereas with duty towarda 
the church, and by intercession for her allowance, with respective attendance 
of her pleasure, no law almost of God or nature so sacred, which, one way 
or other, they find not means to dispense with, or at least-wise permit th^ 
breach of, by connivance and without disturbance." — Page 34, et seq. 

" EuropaB Speculum, or, a View or Survey of the state of Religion in the 
western parts of the w^orld : wherein the Roman Religion, and pregnant 
policies of the church of Rome to support the same, are notably displayed ; 
with some other memorable discoveries and commemorations." — Lond. 1632. 

Sir Edwin Sandys gives the following description of the state 
cf religion in Italy in his time : — 

*'The whole country is strangely overflown and overborne with wickedness^ 
«vilh fiithiness of speech, with beastliness of actions ; both governors and 
subjects — 'both priests and friars, each striving as it were with other in an 
impiidentness therein ; even so far forth, that what elsewhere would not be 
tolerated, is there in high honour — what in some other places even a loos« 
person would be asham^ to confess, their priests and friars refrain not >peiij) 
to pmctiBe.'*— P. 19. 



THE REFORMATION. 173 

Again, p. 160. "It doth grieve me to .^peak, yea, the thoii«rht of it mus* 
needs bring horror and detestation : what a multitude of Atheists do brave it 
in all places — there most, where the papacy is most in his prime — what 
renouncers of God, blasplicmers of liis Son, villanizers of his saints, and 
scorners of his servi';e: who think it a glorious grace to adore the king of a 
country; but to name or think reverently of the Creator of the world, to 
proceed from a timerous base-mindedness and abjectness." 

Sir Edwin Sandys also describes the state of religion in Spain 
in his time. Though Mr. Maguire objected to the authority of 
Mr. White, he cannot refuse to admit that of Sir Edwin Sandys. 

" The next is Spain, reputed wholly the Pope's also, as having been a long 
time governed by the most devoted king, and longer curbed in b} the rnrst 
cruel inquisition that ever the world had for the upholding of that sway." * * 

"For a kingdom that hath the sirname of Cati^'^'' • ' <. greater dangf r 

in the w^orld, either wholly or in great part to ^ciot on Christianity, unless 
grace from above and better wisdom to stay the iiicrease of those pestilent 
cankers of Mahomedanism and Judaism, which threaten the final decay, and 
3ating out of Christianism." — Pp. 163, 164. 

" There is in Spain a sort of people of the Marrany, as they term them, 
who are baptized Jews and Moors, and many of them in secret wilhal 
circnmcised Christians. 

"All which, although conforming themselves in some sort of outwaid show 
unto the Christian religion, yet are thought in heart to be utterly averse from 
it, and to retain an inward desire to return to that superstition, from which 
their ancestors by rigour and terror were driven ; and the Jews will say in 
Italy that there come divers Spaniards to them to be circumcised there, and 
50 away to Constantinople to plant in the east." — Pp. 164, 165. 

I shall not occupy your time with other quotations. You will 
doubtless ask, how could such passages occur in a work which 
apparently advocated the church of Rome. Sir Edwin Sandys 
gave the statement lohich J\Ii\ JMaguire read from his works merely 
as the allegations of Roman Catholic ecclesiastics in support of 
their system.* You shall see whether this charge is not founded 
upon fact. In page 24, Sir Edwin Sandys begins a sketch of 
the arguments which Roman Catholics employ in advocating 
the church of Rome ; and after having given the sketch, he 
adds in page 33 : 

" This is the main course of their persuading at this day, whereby they 
seek to estabhsh that former foundation: in the unfolding whereof i havt 
been the longer, because trial hath taught me, tha* not by some men's private 
election, but, as it should seem, by common order, direction, or consent, they 
have relinquished all other courses, and hold them to this, as the most efiec 
tual means, in the way of persuasion, to insinuate their desire, and to work 
their design." 

Here is *' iniquitas quotationis." — Hear it gentlemen ! Afler 
this expose, 1 ask, is Mr. Maguire justitied in boasting, as he 
has done, of his quotations having been takec from the origmals ? 

« A debate on the above quotation having arisen, viz. whether Mr. Maguire quoted 
it, as put hyjothetically, as it is in the work from which he took it, namely, F' etcher's 
Comparative View, or not ; some gentlemen affirming that he did, and some that h« 
did not— it was agreed that the tex* s lould stand, ai d that this note should be ad l«d. 

15* 



I7i THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

i have brought him to one original, and you have now scca» 
bow ill his quotation bears the test of such an examination ! 

I come more immediately to the question, and I call distincilj 
upon Mr. Maguire to do so. He is, perhaps, reserving some 
yeemingly plausible arguments for the last half hour, when hs 
knows that no opportunity will be afforded me of replying. I call 
on him to reUnquish this ruse de guerre. He may be satisfied 
with the manoeuvre, in which he succeeded the first day, when, 
by speaking at one time but a quarter of an hour, he deprived me 
of the advantage of closing the business of the day ; while he 
had an opportunity of addressmg the meeting in speeches ex- 
ceeding by one those which I delivered. I now call on him to 
come like a man .o ... question : let him not raise a dust, and 
then hide the subject behind the cloud which he has created. 

I have shown that the reformers were justified in their separ- 
ation from the church of Rome, by the debased moral condition 
of that church as well as by the unscriptural nature of her doc- 
trines. Mr. Maguire has asserted, that my quotations, as to the 
immoial character of the church of Rome, were from Protestant 
writers. I beg leave to state, that the authors whose testimonies 
1 brought forward, were Roman CnlhoUcs. Let Mr. Maguire 
show that his church was not in error : let him show that her 
doctrines were scriptural : and then I shall admit that the refor- 
mers were not justified in separating from her communion. Mr. 
Maguire will talk much of the evils of concession, of private 
judgment, and fanaticism, which, he will maintain, were exhib- 
ited at the time of ihe Reformation. We shall hear, doubtless, 
of the character of Henry VHI, of Luther, and of others ; but 
I now say to Mr. Maguire, come to Ihe pointy and do not evad^ 
the question. You stand before an enlightened assembly : the 
PEOPLE of Ireland are becoming daily wiser; they will see, 
believe me, on whose side sophistry exists, and will distinguish 
empty unfounded assertions from soUd proofs; nor will they suffer 
boasts to pass for argument. Let Mr. Maguire then meet me on 
the point at issue. I stand ready to vindicate the Reformation. 

Mr. Maguire. — I never before saw the superiority of ck»se 
argument so triumphantly displayed — has Mr. Pope ever glanced 
at the questions which I put to him so repeatedly and so 
pointedly? I inquired from him the scriptural foundation upon 
which a Protestant can build an act of faith : / expected — you 
expected^ no doubt, a distinct answer to the question — has ht 
dared to give it / Protestants and Catholics, I beseech you to 
look to that. Let the/ar/ he recorded and go forth to ihe world. 
He has quoted fron\ Fra Paolo, who was no Catholic, and whom 
Biflhop Burnett calls a Calvinistic heretic. The Jansenists hav« 



THE REFORMATION. 174 

fteen condemned by the Catholic church, and it is not fair to 
quote them against me. The only CathoUcs to whom he re- 
ferred, were Baronius and Bishop Fisher. 

Protestants and CathoHcs, I again beseech you to remark, 
that my opponent has not attempted to answer the arguments 
which I addressed to him relative to the scriptures : he has 
indeed made an eloquent harangue upon the necessity of the 
Reformation — I shall satisfy you on that subject before I have 
done. It is foolish to endeavour to escape from my direct ar* 
guments by such an artifice. I may remark to Mr. Pope, that 
in quoting historians, he should resort to those of approved 
character, and well established veracity. I repeat my challenge 
to Mr. Pope to answer the arguments which I brought forward 
•elative to the scriptures. I spoke of the scriptures which have 
•een lost: Mr. Pope attempted to throw discredit on them, — 
le said they were mere histories, and not inspired. I ask, 
ivould they have been referred to as holy books, in the genuine 
and inspired writings and recommended there, if they were not 
equallij inspired 1 If they be mere histories, as Mr. Pope would 
have you believe, then the inspired writers must have been guilty 
of fraud in referring to them. Mr. Pope includes in his sweeping 
denunciation, the two epistles of St. Paul, which I proved to 
have been lost. Will Mr. Pope say, that they too were mere 
histories 1 — Will he dare to dispute their inspiration ? — Mr. 
Pope, one would think, wishes to convert religion and scripture 
into mere history. I shall indulge in no rhetorical manoeuvres : 
nor will I amaze you with high sounding language, instead of 
defensive arguments — I shall adhere to close disputation. 1 
appeal to the judgments of the candid and the impartial. Have 
I not shown the fallacy of the few arguments advanced by my 
Reverend opponent? Mr. Pope has put a curious interpre- 
tation on the remarkable words of St. Paul ; *' If I have all 
faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, 
I am nothing." Mr. Pope, says that this is merely a faith that 
2an work miracles. Surely, if the faith which could move 
nountains, and work miracles, could not save a man unless he 
Aad charity ; a fortiori, the faith which could not perform mira- 
cles, would not save a man without charity. He says, that God 
could not contradict himself; and he gave us an eloquent de- 
scription of the wonderful attributes of the Deity — I never gave 
utterance to the absurd and blasphemous opinion, that God 
could contradict himself. Mr. Pope, I repeat, is only raising 
castles in the air for the mere purpose of throwing them dow^n 
again. He has returned to his doctrine of internal evidence— - 
he says, that God Almighty knew that the great mass of man- 
kind would not be able to answer the sophisti.es of the Deists 



1T6 THE JUSTIFICATION OP 

and Infidels ; that owing to their ignoTcince, their habits, and 
their want of opportunities, they would be unable of themse vea 
to remove the objections, which the ingenuity of the unbelievel 
would throw in their way. This is the most powerful argument 
that could be urged, to prove that God did not intend this holy 
book to form the sole rule of man's faith : God always, in his 
infinite wisdom, adapts the means to the end — If Mr, Pope'a 
doctrine were true, would the Almighty have adapted the meani 
to the end? Mr. Pope's doctrine directly militates against the 
attributes of the Deity.- — T again call upon him to tell me >>hat 
particular poi^tion of scripture is sufficient for salvation^ and to 
found his opinion, not upon reasonings, but upon a positive and 
direct text of scripture. 

Gentlemen, in proceeding to discuss the Reformation, I shall, 
at the outset, lay down two principles upon which I found my 
arguments. My first principle is this — that God never, in any 
'nstance, employed notorious characters, savage and ferocious 
men, immoral, and self-degraded wretches, to reform religion. 
My second proposition is, that the reformers of the sixteenth 
century were men of that description. If I prove both these 
propositions, and neither, I imagine, can be leasonably disputed, 
I shall bring this argument to a speedy conclusion. Be pleased 
to observe, that in all history we read of no reformers of reli 
gion but Moses and the prophets, Jesus Christ, and the Apos- 
ties, who were the agents and instruments under Christ. Mosea 
may, in the strict sense of the word, be called the reformer of tho, 
Patriachal religion. Religion had been preserved to his days 
by the tradition of the patriarchs. If we revert to the patriarchs, 
we will find God preserving religion, not through the instrumen- 
tality of bad and proverbially corrupt men, but of such charac* 
ters as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Stc. For the space of two 
(housand years, religion was preserved by the patriarchs, before 
a line of scripture was written. Religion was then wafied down 
by their tradition, pure, simple, and uncorrupted. But the time 
arrived when the old religion was to be built upon a more per- 
manent basis, to be reformed, and enlarged. Moses was selected 
by God for that purpose, to combine the traditions of the patri- 
archs into one settled law. Moses proved his extraordinary 
mission by the performance of manifest and splendid miracles. 
The prophets too proved their divine mission by unquestioned 
miracles. When our Saviour came to perfect the Jewish reli- 
gion, do we not read of the splendid mij acles performed by him 
in attestation of his character as a retormer? Did not the 
Redeemer declare, that if he had not performed such miracles, 
the Jews who disbelieved, would have had no sin in themi Did 
he not emphatically sav, that if he had not performed such mira 



THE REFORMAIION 177 

ties, thev woiild have been justified in putting him to death 1 I 
Reversal I, that God granted infallibility to the Jewish synagogue, 
but I affirm, that it never, de facto erred till the prophecies were 
accomplished, and the Redeemer came, who then established hia 
church, to which he promised infffllibility in express terms. If, 
(hen, the Jewish church, to which infallibility was not promised, 
did not err till the coming of Christ, a fortiori^ the church which 
Christ established, and to which be expressly promised infalli- 
bility will never err. Hear the words of Christ himself : 

"^ The church is the pillar and ground of truth."—" The gates of hell shall 
Acver prevail against it." — " He that will not hear the church, let him be unto 
tliee as the heathen and the publican." — "I will send you the spirit of truth 
to teach you all truth." — " I will send yoir another Paraclete, to abide with 
YOU FOR EVER." — " Yc are the light of the world." — '* Ye are the salt of the 
earth." — '* A city built upon a mountain crnnot be concealed." 

It is Mr. Pope who would make ^he God of Heaven contra- 
dict himself. As the poor and ignorant man could never oi 
himself ascertain the inspiration of the scriptures, nor discover 
therein Mr. Pope's rule of faith — God appointed the living 
authority of the church to guide and dir<ect him, and which church 
I have already proved to be infallible. 

Mr. Pope has recurred to the mass . and quoted the apostate 
Blanco White — a notable authority truW. to oppose the authority 
and credit of the Catholic church. He might as well quote the 
authority of Julian the apostate, against the Catholic church. 
We are desired by St. Paul to avoid a heretic, as one condemned 
by his private judgment — proprio judicio condemnatus — and St. 
John forbids to even salute him, Mr. Pope says, that I make 
him a heretic — I deny that, in the sense in which I used the word 
heretic, Mr. Pope is one. He was born of Protestant par^•nts — 
I say with St. Augustin, that he is a heretic who goes out of ihe 
church of himself and chooses a religion of his own. 

Dr. Johnson, who was a Protestant, and whose ort iodoxy 
cannot be questioned — whose piety and devotion were vvel knowD 
offered up prayers for his mother. 

In the course of his observations, Mr. Pope has alluded to the 
longer time which was granted me to speak on the first day. Il 
arose from the circumstance of my having sat down on my pre- 
viDus half hours too soon, and consequently, I was allowed a 
fe^v minu.es at the close of the discussion to make up for that 
deficiency. I had prop )sed then that the discussion should be 
carried on by interrogat )ry, and it strikes me that that would 
be the better way of conducting it. By the interrogative mode, 
you perceive, that I have already succeeded in making my 
opponent give contradictory an swers to two questions reluuve to 
the circulation of the sacrei JCiipturcs while he $uppi«#^hfi 



78 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

,xad confined me in an imaginary circle, I put a question to him 
which he has not attempted to answer. He could not tell what 
portion of scripture was necessary^ to instruct unto salvation^ of 
what portion unnecessary. 

It is rather strange, that Mr. Pope, who professes such vene* 
ration for the Son of God, should make nothing of the promises 
of our Saviour to his church, and endeavour to explain them 
away by sophistry and absurd metaphysical distinctions. Lei 
Umt fact be marked — who then is the advocate of the Bible ? [, 
who hold that the sacred word of the Redeemer, bears the stamp 
jf oternal truth, or he who attempts to explain away that eternal 
word by allegories and metaphors ? This is the man, forsooth, 
who pretends to believe nothing but what is contained in the 
scriptures ! I insist that God has revealed truths which are not 
in the sacred scriptures. I maintain that the word of God is 
infallible, and I maintain that the promises made by Christ to his 
church that she shall never err — promises so plain, so explicit, 
and so obvious — promises which are dwelt upon and repeated 
by the holy Fathers, are eternally true and can never fail. 
" Heaven and earth will pass away^ but my words will never pass 
away.^^ I have already read to this meeting, various passages 
from the Fathers in support of the doctrines of infallibility, pur- 
gatory, and the invocation of saints. 

With regard to the reformers, I have laid down a clear princi- 
ple — that God will never employ openly abandoned, proverbi- 
ally vicious, self convicted, immortal men, as the reformers of a 
pre-existing church, or of any religion. I have already proved 
from the sacred volume, that the extraordinary ministers of his 
^jLcred word shall have the broad seal of his mission, to wit, 
' tirades, affixed upon them. If it be proved that the ordinary 
I. linisters of religion may be vicious and corrupt, it does not 
follow that the extraordinary ministers of religion, who came 
forward as reformers, should bear that character. Christ did 
not preach his mission without exhibiting to the world the great 
seal of divinity. 

The mission to which Luther, and Calvin, and Cranmer pre- 
tended, was not an ordinary one. If their mission were an 
ordinary one, they should have remained in that church which 
existed before thern. They should have shown an extraordiniary 
mission before they^ departed from that church, which consisted 
of all the Christian churches in communion with the see of Rome 
where her visible head resided, showing forth the commission 
granted by Christ to his church. Luther's commission (if any) 
as a reformer of the Catholic church, must have been an extra- 
ordinary one. Did he prove it by miracles ? It is said indeed 
that Calvin, in order to prove his mission by n miracle, to remove 



THE REFORMATION. 179 

fhe objections agdnst him on that head, induced a man for a large 
sum of money to feign death, in order that he (Calvin) might 
get the credit of raising him from the dead. The man, however, 
literally rose no more, and Calvin took good care never to repeat 
the experiment. 

1 shall now proceed to give you the character of the Cii'. olic 
church, from writers, whose authority I suppose my harned 
adversary will not be inclined to dispute. Every line which 1 
shall quote shall be from Protestant historians. Observe, I am 
not about to quote from masked Papists against the Protestant 
church, as my opponent has quoted from masked Protestants 
against the Catholic church. 

Dr. Spry says, 

" From the facts which are recorded in scripture, and which other historical 
testimony confirms, we infer that the Apostles, in the exercise of the power 
vested in them, instituted that ecclesiastical polity which was maintained itt 
the church until the period of the Roformation,^^ 

Davis says, 

*' ^t is acknowledged on all hands, that the church of Rome, in its original 
state, was ApoL?tohcal and pure. And even at the present day, it has per- 
severed in all the fundamental articles of the true and Christian faith. And 
vhe sacraments ordained by the Gospel are here administered by a priesthood 
which derives its appointment, by an uninterrupted succession, from the Apos- 
tles, and its authority from our Great Master.'''' 

No wonder, indeed, that these learned Protestant Divines 
should so frankly and openly avow, that our doctrine and our 
priesthood are derived from the Apostles, and our authority to 
preach and teach, from our Great Master himself. For as they 
3ceived whatever is valid of their ordination from us, such con- 
• "ssion is absolutely necessary to prop up their own quaking 
system, and to give even a specious colour to their claims. 
Dr. Daubeny thus writes : 

" The commission originally delivered by Christ to his Apostles, has be^^n 
Tianded down in regular succession. Under the autharitu of this commissionj 
the religion of Christ was introduced mto this country, at a very early period: 
and the appointment of ministers under the sanction of the Divine Authoi* 
ity, has been uniformly received and preserved in the church, wherever it haa 
existed, fcr 1500 years." 

Tn the British Critic, we read, 

" The church government maintained by the church of Rome, has been 
\ractd loithout a single break in the chain, up to the immediate successors of the 
Apostles : and the chain of the episcopacy was unbroken for 1500 years,^^ 

Dr. Tomline, in his Elements, says : 

** When the Reformation took place in England, the Bishops and clergy 
p^ere not consecrated and ordained again. They had received consecration 
ana ordination from men to whom the power of consecrat'ng and ordaining 
had been transmitted from the Apostles : and that power wbls not vitiated.^ 



180 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

Daube. J thus defines Schism : 

** Wherever there is a wilful separation from the comrn; n^on o< the cuurcii 
bt Christ, there, according to the original idea upon this subject, a division o 
Christ e mystical body takes place ; and there the sin of schism is to be found 
Schism then consists in a disunion of the members of the church, occasioned 
by the want of obedience to the government which Christ by his Apostiet 
seitled \'A it ; and a consequent separation from its communion, in contradic* 
tion to the divine plan of its establishment." 

Mr. Pope — Gentlemen, I beg to observe that my quotations 
nave been from Roman Catholic authors. Though I have 
referred to Father Paul during the discussion, yet on this day I 
have not quoted from his writings. I again ask, whether greater 
difficulties do not lie on the side of Mr. Maguire than on mine, 
in providing for the spiritual wants of the poor. We are not to 
dictate to the Almighty : we are not to reason from the line oi 
procedure which in our conceptions the Deity ought to adopt : we 
are not to bring his dispensations to the bar of our erring judg- 
ments : we are to draw our conclusions from what God has 
done — not from what we rnay imagine^ He ought to have done. 
I have not this day quoted the authority of Mr. White, although 
I beheve him to be a most respectable and conscientious man. 
My friend says that I am not a heretic. I may thank him as an 
individual for the admission; but I beg to know by what authority 
he makes the assertion ? According to the doctrines of the 
church of Rome, I need scarcely remark, that all who are with- 
out her pale are heretics, infidels, or excommunicated persons. 
It is well known, that exclusive salvation is her doctrine, except 
in cases of invincible ignorance ; and invincible ignorance, I thank 
God, can rarely be the lot of any Protestant in these countries. 
With respect to Sir Edwin Sandys, I am perfectly satisfied that 
a Roman Catholic and a Protestant clergyman should examine 
the original work, and decide the question at issue between us. 
[Mr. Maguire agreed to this proposal.] My friend has told us 
that God never employed bad men to accomplish the Reforma- 
tion of his church. Our question is not, wiiethei the instru- 
ments were good or evil, but whether the separation from the 
rjrirch of Rome, which took place in the sixteenth century, was 
justifiable. Mr. Maguire has referred to one or two authorities* 
to show that there existed some immoral men among the reform- 
ers, and particulailv instanced Luther. In noticing these charges, 
permit me to remind you that I am descending from the real 
pomt at issue. I again assert, that the question before us han; 
not been met on the part of Mr. Maguire. I would imprest 
this fact upon the minds of the po| ulation at large. My friend 
has quotea from Protestant authorities in favour of the churcb 
of Rome : but I would ask, did those quotations meet the charge^ 



THE REFORMATION. 18l 

brovight against her at the time of the Reformation. One 
of those quotations, referring to her doctrines, says, that she 
♦•etains all fundamental truths. ^V'ere 1 to grant this assertion 
yet our charge is that she has adied novelties to those funda- 
mental truths, and by that addition nulhfied them. With respect 
to the character of Luther, I beg to read you a quotation from 
Maimbourg, a Roman Catholic historian, quoted in Fry's Church 
History, p. 284. 

'* He lived a moral life, and was not given, in the smallest 

DCGRSE, TO COVETOUSNESS OR ANT OTHER VICE." 

My friend asserts that Moses, and the prophets, and our Lord 
Jesus Christ, were moral men, and proved the divinity of their 
mission by miracles. Need I say, that I admit the truth of the 
observation ] I shall meet it : you, gentlemen, shall judge 
whether I do so successfully. Moses came to give perfection 
to the preceding dispensation : so did the Lord Jesus Christ. 
The reformers did not usher in a new dispensation, neither did 
they add any thing to that which was at the time in existence : 
they only returned to first principles : they dash to the grouna 
the unscriptural superstructure which had been raised by the 
church of Rome, and brought to light the fundamental truths of the 
Christian system, in their native symmetry, beauty, and strength. 
A.S they did not introduce a new dispensation, it was nut, there- 
fore, necessary that they should perform miracles. I find, that 
under the Jewish dispensation, the Israelites were cautioned 
against those, who even predicted events which actually camo 
to pass, but who endeavoured to lead the people into error : 

" If there arise in the midst of thee a prophet, or one that saith he hath 
dreamed a dream, and he foretell a sign and wonder, and that come to pass 
which he spoke ; and he say to thee, let us go and follow strange gods, which 
thou knowest not, and let us serve them ; thou shah not hear the words of 
that prophet or dreamer, for the Lord your God trieth you, that it may appear 
whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul, or no; follow 
the Lord your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and his voice: 
him you shall serve, unto him you shall cleave : and that prophet or forger oi 
dreams shall be slain, because he spoke to draw you away from the Lord 
your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out 
of the house of bondage, to make thee go out of the way which the Lord thy 
Qod commanded thee : and thou shalt takeaway the evil out of the midst of 
thee." — Deut xiii, 1, &c. 

Our Lord nimself, though he performed miracles, did not 
merely refer to them^ in proof of his mission, but to the Old Tes- 
tament, to Moses, the Law, and the Prophets. I would ask, 
did not the performance of miracles terminate, after the Chris- 
tian dispensation had been established upon earth? — Christ him* 
self cautioned his followers against der.eivers, in th^ following 
language • 

15 



18S THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

" If any nian shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ, or there, do not believt 

Kim ; for there shall arise false Christs and false Prophets, and shall show 
great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive, if possible, even the elect: 
behold, I have told it to you bejorehatid,^^ — Matt, xxiv, 24. 

Again, we are informed, that the working of signs and lying 
wonders, is n characteristic of the Man of Sin. 

^ Whose ca ling," the Apostle says, " is according to the working of Satan, 
in all power, tnd signs, and lying wonders, and in all seduction of iniquity 
tc them that perish, because they received not the love of the truth, that they 
rjiigrit be saved : therefore God shall send the operation of error to believe lying, 
that all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to 
iniquity."— 2 Thess. ii, 9 — 11. 

Again, the working of miracles is mentioned as a character- 
istic of one of the beasts : 

" And I saw another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two 
boms hke a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon, and he executed all the power 
of the former beast in his sight, and he caused the earth and them that dwell 
therein, to adore the first beast, whose wound to death was healed ; and he 
did great signs, so that he made also fire come down from heaven unto the 
earth in the sight of men, and he seduced them that dwell on the earth for the 
signs which were given him to do in the sight of the beast, saying to them 
that dwell on the earth, that they should make the image of the beast, which 
had the wound by the sword, and lived : and it was given him to give life to 
the image of the beast, and that the image of the beast should speak, and 
should cause, that whosoever would not adore the image of the beast, should 
be slain : and he shall make all, both little and great, rich and poor, freemen 
and bondmen, have a character in their right hand or on their foreheads : and 
that no man might buy or sell but he that hath the character or the name of 
the beast, or the number of his name." — Apocalypse, xiii, 12 — 17. 

You can now determine whether, if even the reformers had 
been able to perform miracles, that power, per se^ alone, would 
i ave entitled them to act as divinely commissioned. 

Mr. Maguire asks, by what means religion was handed down 
to the time of Moses ? He should remember, that the head of 
each family of God's people was both patriarch and priest of his 
own house ; that the great age of those who lived before the 
flood, enabled them personally to communicate to their posterity 
divine truth ; and, that their religion consisted of a few simple 
principles. My opponent says, that the Jewish synagogue never 
erred. I beg to remind him, that the Jewish church was of divine 
orighi, but that the synagogue was of human institution. I repeat 
it- -the synagogue was of human institution. If we refer to 
scripture, we find that the leaders and priests of the Israelites 
erred. In Exodus, xxxii, 6, we read — 

" They said, these are thy Gods, O Israel, that have brought thee out of 
the land of Egypt And when Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it, and 
made proclanvation /»y a crier's voice, saying, * to-morrow is the solemnity o*' 
the Lord.'" 



THE REFORMATION. 185 

I wonder whether Aaron is deemed to have been infa'Jible, 
A^hen he sanctioned idolatry ! Again, we read the following 
description of the spiritual guides of Israel : 

" His watchmen are all blind, they are all ignorant, dumb dogs, not able to 
bark, seeing vain things, sleeping and loving dreams, and most impudent 
dogs, they never had enough: the shepherds themselves knew no understand. 
»ng : all have turned aside unto their own way, every one after his own gain, 
from the fi~st even to the last. Come, let us take wine and be tilled with 
drunkenness : and it shall be as to-day, so also to-morrow, and much more." 
baiah, Ivi, 10. 

In Malachi, we read, 

•' The lips of the priest shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law 
at his mouth, because he is the angel of the Lord of Hosts." 

What follows ? 

*' But you are departed out of the way, and have caused many to stumble at the 
*'?<■», you have made void the covenant of Levi, saith the Lord of Hosts ; therefore 
hwe I made you contemptible, and base before all people, as you have not kept m| 
fiat/5, and have accepted persons in the laiv.^'' — Chap, ii, 7, 9. 

So much for the infallibility of the Jewish teachers. Mj 
friend has observed, that the synagogue and ecclesiastical rulers 
were infallible, till Christ came, and that infallibility was then 
transferred to Jesus. I beg to know at what precise period the 
prerogative was transferred from the Jewish synagogue ? Was 
it while the Scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses' chair, am. 
while Jesus commanded the people to hear them ? Was infalli- 
bility taken from them at that time ] I have showed you from 
Deuteronomy, that miracles per se, alone, were not sufficient to 
prove that even the Saviour was divinely commissioned, unless 
he arlso referred to the testimony of Scripture. I would ask, 
was it not said of the Jewish hierarchy, "have any of the Rulers 
or Pharisees believed on him ? — (John vii, 47.) 

Mr. Maguire here interrupted, and said — I told you that the 
synagogue did not err de facto until the coming of Christ, but I 
did not say that infallibility was conferred upon it by God. 

Mr. Pope — Gentlemen, Mr. Maguire has said, that, although 
infallibility was not the privilege of the synagogue, yet it never 
erred ds facto until Christ appeared. Now Mr. Maguire looks 
upon the synagogue as having been the representative of the 
Jewish church, and Roman Catholics, by analogy founded on 
the Jewish church, argue in favour of the infalhbility of their 
own. I assert that those who believed that Jesus was the Christ, 
and followed the Saviour, must have done so in opposition to 
their rulers, and must ha/e exercised their own private }\idgmenta 
on the proofs that Jesus was the Son of God. My friend asks, 
« oae man to sei up h'js judgment against many ? There are 



(84 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

extrcn. e cases when such a procedure may be absolutely neces* 
sary. Such occurred, when, as I have already observed, accord- 
ing to Vincentius Lirinensis, (Com. 1, cap. 6,) and Jerome, 
(in Dial, contra. Lucifer,) the whole world had become Arian. 
A Christian man, as Athanasius did, must at that period have 
stood out against the whole world. Christ selected a {ew to 
stand against the many, nor should the believer refuse to join 
the persecuted ranks of the followers of Jesus, though the world 
be against them. 

In order to show that Luther was not the impetu ^us headstrong 
person, which his enemies represent him to have been, permit 
me to read you a passage from his writings : 

" We allow that in the Papacy are many good things ; and all those good 
things we have retained. What we affirm is this; that the Popes have in 
many instances corrupted the Apostolic church; and have preferred their 
own laws and ordinances to the laws and ordinances of Christ. Therefore, 
all that accumulated mass of human contrivances, which is of Satan's sug- 
gestion, and contributes to the destrucion of the church of God, rather than to 
its edification, we entirely disapprove and reject: but stop here. We would 
noi imitate the man who on seeing his brother in the utmost danger of being 
killed by a wild boar, instantly pierced both the boar and and his brother with 
one thrust of his spear. Perhaps some Papists will accuse me of flattering 
the Pope in this instance; My answer is ; if the Pope will bear such flat- 
tery as this, I will become his obedient son ; I will be a good Papist and wiij 
recant all that 1 have said to oflfend him." — Com. de Luth. ii, xl, 13, 14. 

In other words, if the errors of the church of Rome were 
removed, Luther says, that he would return to her communion. 

I shall also give you the opinion of a learned and grave Ro- 
man Catholic divine, which will show you, at whose door is to 
be laid the cause of separation. Cassander was appointed by 
the two emperors Ferdinand and Maximillian, to endeavour tc 
heal the breach which had taken place between the reformed and 
the church of Rome. He observes, 

" Yet I cannot deny, but that, in the beginning, many, out of a godly zea) 
and care were driven to a sharp and severe reproof of certain manifest abuses ; 
and that the principal cause of this calamity and distraction of the church is la 
he laid wpon those, which being puffed up ivith a vain insolent conceit of theif 
ecclesiastical power, proudly and scornfully contemned and rejected them, which 
did rightly and modestly admonish their reformation. Wherefore, my opinion 
18, that the church can never hope for any firm peace, unless they make th€ 
beginning, which have given the cause of this distraction : that is, unless thosf 
which are in place of ecclesiatical government, will be content to remit some* 
thing of their too much rigour, and )ield somewhat to the peace o7the churcFi, 
and hearkening unto the earnest prayers and admonitions of many godly wen, 
will set themselves to correct manifest abuses according to the rule of divin, 
9criptures, and of the ancient church from, lohich they have swervedJ'^ — Consult 
pp. 56, 57. 

My friend has told a long story about Calvin, I could relate 
several strange stories ; for instance, about St. Anthony preach 
ing to the fishes, and various other lu iicrous anecdotes. 



THE REFORMATION. 185 

I beg to make an observation, relative to a passage from n 
Protestant writer in reference to the church of Rome being 
Rpostohc. The church of Rome, I admit, was pure in the apos- 
tolic times, when Paul addressed his epistle to her ; but I now 
protest against her, as having departed from her great original, 
and as having added various doctrines and ordinances to those 
revealed in the sacred scripture. Mr. Maguire will, doubtless 
ask me, where was thi church before Luther? I am prepared 
to answer him. 

Mi. Maguire. — Mr. Pope has asserted, that the poor man la 
placed under worse circumstances as to making an act of faith, 
according to my priciples, than according to the principles which 
he advocates. I imagined I had satisfactorily proved that it is 
utterly impossible for any ignorant Protestant to make a prudent 
act of faith in the inspiration of the sacred volume^ unless he were 
able to examine every passage, compare every text, reconcile 
every apparent contradiction, and be prepared to solve every 
doubt, and satisfy his own conscience touchng the various and 
multiplied objections of the x\theist, the Deist, and other infidels. 
Now as this is impossible for an ignorant Protestant ; hence it is 
impossible he can make a prudent act of faith. Look, foi 
instance, at what are called the lies of the patriarchs ; examine 
the description and dimensions of Noah's ark — how would the 
ignorant Protestant show that two of every species of animal 
were contained therein, since, according to the dimensions given, 
two whales alone could scarcely find accommodation. On the 
other hand, the poor Catholic has but one simple solitary fact to 
ascertain, viz. — has Christ established an unerring church, with 
authority to teach and judge for her children. The moment this 
one fact has been ascertained by him, he can make an act of 
fdith explicitly in the authority of that church, and every other 
article of Revelation which she proposes to his belief. He submits 
with certainty to the authority of that church, and he laughs to 
scorn the accumulated objections of the deists. He may not, 
I will admit, be able to solve all the doubts and difficulties 
collected by infidels, but he relies upon the express promises of 
Jesus Christ to his church, and believes in all articles which that 
church professes to have received from her Divine Founder. 

I am surprised that Mr. Pope has never essayed to answer 
the questions which I put to him touching those articles of 
Protestant faith which are not to he found in any part of ike sacred 
tcriptures. 

In defence of the Protestant Reformation, he quotes Dryden 
the poet, as an authority of mighty importance. As the gentle- 
man deals se largely in fiction^ I cannot blame him for having 

16* 



186 THE JUSTIFICATION OP 

recourse to the evidence of the poets. In the present instaiire 
however, he has been singularly unfortunate, for Dryden, deeplj 
dej Icring that he had ever said or written an) thing against the 
Catholic church, to which he subsequently became a convert, 
had recoarse to the tribunal of Confession, as the ordinary means 
appointed by Christ to obtain forgiveness of sins. He was en- 
joined by his confessor to exert those rare talents which it pleased 
God to bestow upon him, in defence of the truth. He therefore 
translated the life of Francis Xavier, an Indian Roman Catholic 
Missionary, equally esteemed by Protestants and Catholics, nol 
only for the extent of his missionary labours, but the simplicity 
purity, and self-denial which he manifested throughout his whole 
life. Dryden also wrote that curious poem called ' the Hind and 
Panther,' in which he describes the church of England as a hun- 
gry, ferocious and prowling wild beast, pursuing with open moutb 
and merciless avidity the Catholic church, which he denominates 
a spotless Hind. So much for the authority of Dryden against 
the doctrines of the Catholic church. 

I appeal to all candid Protestants to say whether Mr. Pope 
has, in the remotest degree, approached the irrefragable argu- 
ment which I brought forward as to the books of scripture which 
have been lost. I called upon him to say, if all the books of scrip- 
ture were necessary. Supposing that he answered in the affir- 
mative, I have proved that we have not at present all the books of 
scripture, there being full twentij of them lost. I then placed him 
in the other alternative, and called upon him to show, that a por- 
tion only of the scripture would be sufficient for salvation, and 
to establish his opinion by a direct and positive text of scripture. 
Mr. Pope has quoted a text from St. Paul, where writing to 
Timothy, he says, that the scriptures are " profitable to teach, to 
correct, to instruct in all righteousness." 

Is there here a proof that your sole rule of faith is to be 
ibunded upon any certain portion^ or upon the whole of the scrip- 
tures 1 I again repeat the question, whether or not it is neces- 
sary for salvation to know the whole scriptures, or a portion of 
them? and I require an answer from scripture to the question* 
Mr. Pope has, in the above extract, quoted St. Paul when he 
was writing to Timothy, who was not a layman, but a bishop 
and metropolitan of Asia. It was the duty of Timothy to know 
the holy scriptures, in order to teach them to others. Was a 
bishop hound to teach and instruct in the holy scriptures 1 If he 
was, was he not bound to know them ? 

in order to prove the scriptures to be the sole rule of faitn, 
flir. Pope has assorted, that the Old Testament was ordered tc be 
read in many places. But he should recollect, that it »vas to be 
interpreted according to the synagogv,e. 



THE ri:formation. 187 

No wonder a bishop is to understand the scriptures, when he 
IS obliged to preach and expound them. Such must be the pro- 
vince of the bishops and clergy, or every man may assert for 
himwielf the right of preaching. I ask, in the presence of Pro* 
tesiani bishops^ whether it be the right of every tinker anc low 
ignorant mechanic to take upon them to " teach, to preach, to 
correct, and instruct?" 

Our Saviour said, " search the scriptures." It is perfectly 
fight to do so. The Redeemer appealed to the common sense 
of the Jews to decide upon the proofs of his divine mission. To 
what else should we appeal, but to the common sense of a man 
before he ^ecognizes authority ? I have already informed you, 
that every man is to employ his common sense to discover the 
marks of the church of Christ. But when he discovers those 
marks of the true church, he at once submits his judgment to her 
authority. Immediately after the text, " search the scriptures," 
as quoted by Mr. Pope, the Saviour adds, "for in them you 
think you have eternal life." This is a manifest proof, that 
eternal life is not to be found in them alone, otherwise Christ 
would not have said, " for in them you think,^^ 

I should much wish that the advocate of unlimited private judg- 
ment would not endeavour to force his own opinions upon others. 

Mr. Pope has quoted passages from Catholic writers regard- 
ing the promoting causes of the Reformation. All allow that a 
reformation was required, but it w as a reformation of morals and 
discipline, and not a change in religion. If any man will say 
that a reformation in the doctrines of the church of Christ was 
required, I shall only remind him of the words of St. Paul : 

'* Bui though I or an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you, besides 
that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema." 

The doctrine then of the church of Christ never was to be 
changed. There was to be no other doctrine. Will it be said 
by my opponent that the promises of Christ to his church failed 
— that she fell into error — that all had become heretics, and that 
therefore Luther and Calvin were justified in adding to, and 
reforming the doctrines of the church ? 

The despotic conduct of the clergy proves nothing, when 
adduced to show that a reformation was required in doctrine. I 
admit that it was principally bishops and ecclesiastics who 
broached heresies, and erected heretical churches, and not the 
poor — but that only proves the danger which arises from reading 
and interpreting the scriptures without the due dispositions ; and 
strongly illustrates the effects which would flow from an indis" 
criminate circulation of the sacred scriptures without note or 
comment. If those who had devoted their lives to the study of 
the scriptures, should happen to be led into error, how much 



188 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

more might we expect that the poor ignorant man would, ir 
perusing them, adopt erroneous opinions ? Mr. Pope not only 
charges error to the account of the Catholic church, but he 
admits that the church of England is wrongs for he protests against 
twenty-one out of her thirty-nine published articles of belief. Con- 
sequently he must believe that the church of England teaches 
that ichich is not true. And I have no doubt but I myself am a 
better church of England man than my friend Mr. Pope. Mr. 
Pope has said that our Saviour did not come to reform the 
Jewish church. 

Mr. Pope. — What I said was, that he came to give perfee 
tion to the Mosaic dispensation, by the establishment of the full 
Christian economy. 

Mr. Maguire. — What is perfecting a law, but reforming it 1 
I affirm that Christ came to reform the law of Moses, as Mosea 
reformed the religion of the patriarchs. One of the tenets of the 
Jewish rehgion was, that a man may turn away his wife, on any 
pretext, and take another. This, with many other points o^the 
moral code, has been altered in the dispensation of Christ. I 
therefore affirm that Christ came to reform the Jewish law ; and 
he himself tells the Jews, that if he had not done the works 
which he performed, those who refused to believe in him wo'ild 
have no sin in them. 

Here our Saviour directly appeals to miracles in proof of the 
truth of his mission. I believe that the Son of the Almighty God 
performed those miracles in order that the Jewish people might 
have no excuse left them. Christ appealed to miracles — surely 
that will not be denied. Mr. Pope says that our Saviour came 
to restore the Mosaic law. Would God have punished the man 
with death who departed from that law, if he intended that such 
an authority should lead into error? Mr. Pope will say that the 
synagogue rejected Christ. I assert that the synagogue did not 
err till the coming of the Redeemer was proved by manifest mira- 
cles, and the mission of him established of whom Moses said, 
" The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a prophet of thy nation, and of 
tliy hrethren, Hke unto me; hear ye /im." 

When Christ did come, the three kings from the east, ^ho 
scught him, called on Herod to know where was the promised 
Messiah to be found. Herod relied not on his private judgment; 
he sent to the Scribes and Pharisees who sat in the chair oj 
Mosesy and they all agreed it was in Bethlehem of Juda, that 
the Redeemer was to be born ; and they quoted the words of the 
prophet. The Jews, therefore, who refused to believe in Christ 
bad no excuse ; they were inexcusable for not believing in hid 



THE REFORMATION. 189 

mission, respecting which all the predictions of tne prophets 
concurred. I have proved to you that Christ reformed the 
Jewish religion ; but I do not say that he introduced a perfectly 
new religion. As our Saviour then appealed to miracles when 
he came to reform the law of Moses, we are justly entitled to 
call for miracles on the part of Luther and Calvin, who pretended 
that they came to reform our church, which had continued from 
the days of Christ for fifteen hundred years. Will it be said by 
any mar, that the reformers of the sixteenth century, referred to 
miracles in proof of their mission ? 

I call upon Mr. Pope to produce any Catholic historian of 
established credit, who admits that any other reformation was 
required than that of morals and discipline. Erasmus, who 
wrote more licentiously on that subject than any other Catholic 
with whose works I am acquainted, did admit a reformation in 
morals and discipline — but decidedly not in doctrine, I insist 
that I have established the fact, that till the coming of Christ, 
the Jewish synagogue did not err in doctrine ; or, in other words, 
that it was infallible. — Our Saviour says to his disciples — 

" The Scribes and Pharisees have sat m the chair of Moses. All, there- 
fore, whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do ; but according tc 
their work do ye not." 

Here our divine Lord, though about to introduce a more per- 
fect dispensation, refers bis disciples to the authority of the 
established teachers, until he had revealed the object of his mis- 
sion. Did the soi-disant reformers do so ? Christ, therefore, 
referred the Jews to the existing authorities, nor did he recall 
that advice till he had established his own church on the basis of 
Enumerable miracles, Christ als-o gave to his Apostles the power 
of working miracles, in order to the diffusion and establishment 
"f his church on earth. I suppose Mr. Pope will admit that 
miracles were wrought in the primitive church. As to the argu- 
ment which he deduced from the conduct of some Popes, I have 
already shown to you that there is a wide difference between 
doctrines of faith and morality, between infl\llibility and impec- 
cability. The Apostle Peter sinned, but he could not err in 
faith, for he was inspired. Infallibility is the attribute of the 
body of the church in globo — it does not exist in the individual 
members, but in the collective body of the faithful. There are 
many qualities which belong to the body corporate^ and which are 
not found in the individuals composing that body. For exam- 
ple, the vote of a single individual in Parliament avails nothing, 
but the votes of the collective body, form the law of the land. 

Mr. Pope says, that Aaron is to be charged with the worship 
of the golden calf — I did not say, that Aaron was infal^ble — 
but I affirm, that Moses was a greater authority than Aaroiu 



190 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

Aaron ftad only an ordinary — Moses an extraordinary mission 
When Moses was speaking with God on the mountain, he mter- 
ceded with the Ahnighty for the Israelites, and prevailed upon 
God to forgive them. He prayed to God if he should not for- 
give them, to blot his name out of the book of life. God dio 
forgive them, and remitted in a wonderful meas ire the punish- 
ment decreed against them. 

Our divine Lord came to establish an authority above that of 
the Jewish synagogue, and he performed miracles to give an 
undoubted assurance to his mission. John the Baptist referred 
to the miracles which he knew Christ would perform, and Christ 
appealed to the prophecies of John the Baptist. This perhaps 
will be called by Mr. Pope a circulus vitiosus^ and yet he cannot 
doubt the reality of the miracles of Christ. My reverend oppo- 
nent has asked whether the Scribes and Pharisees, who sat in 
the chair of Moses, did not oppose Christ? Certainly — but it 
remains to be shown, that they publicly condemned Christ until 
their authority was superseded by a greater authority sent from 
God, Christ Jesus his Son. 

Mr. Pope has referred to the times of the Arians, and has 
quoted St. Jerome, as saying the world was astonished to find 
itself Arian at once. I admit this hyperbole on the part of St. 
Jerome ; but it is one that can be easily explained. Liberius, 
Mr. Pope informs us, signed the confession of Sirmium. Dr. 
Cave, a greater man than Mr. Pope, in his Life of Athanasius, 
declares that it is not known whether it was the confession &1 
Sardica or Sirmium, which was signed by Pope Liberius. No\\-,, 
as it is a matter of historical doubt, which Mr. Pope himself 
cannot clear up, and which the learned Dr. Cave was unable to 
decide, am I not at liberty to doubt, whether Liberius signed 
either the one or the other ? But admitting the fact, I deny that 
it necessarily follows, that Liberius became an Arian. I believe 
I can easily show, that the very reverse is true. Liberius, a 
good and pious man, according to Dr. Cave, was banished into 
Thrace by the Arian emperor, because he refused to sign a 
formulary of faith which had been previously subscribed by the 
Sirmium bishops. In this state of exile he continued for two 
years, suffering such hardships and privations as our modem 
saints would scarcely endure. He was at length permitted to 
return, if we may believe Theodoret, at the intercession of the 
Roman ladies, who, making a very imposing appearance, waited 
uoon the emperor, as he entered their city, and obtained hb 
consent, that their venerated pontiff should return to the dis- 
charge of his duties. Granting, I say, that at his return he vvaa 
prevailed upon to sign the Sirmium confession, it remain? i\A 
Mr. Pope to show that this confession \»as Jirian. 



THE REFORMATION. 19 

Now, I affirm, m the face of a learned body of men, that the 
formulary subscribed by the bishops at Sirmium was ptirely 
orthodox ; and that the only objection to it was, that it did not 
contain the word ofiovaiovy which was introduced at the council 
of Nice. But in all other respects it condemned and anathe- 
matised the Jirian heresy, as may be seen by the most superfi- 
cial observ^er, by glancing over the confession itself. Liberius, 
therefore, might justly conclude that the word ouovaiov was not 
essential to our orthodox formulary of faith, especially as it was 
wholly unknown to antiquity. The Arians, finding that this 
formulary had been signed by many truly orthodox bishop?, 
immediately cried out, that the Catholic prelates gave their 
solemn sanction to Arianism. The people who were not pre- 
sent, but who had heard of the subscription, were alarmed and 
astonished at the reports so industriously circulated ; and hence 
St. Jerome used that well-known expression, that the whole 
world was astonished to find itself Arian. But the falsehoods 
of the Arians were shortly detected, and the faithful restored to 
confidence and peace. So much for the hyperbole of the great 
and good St. Jerome. 

Mr. Pope. — Gentlemen : as to Pope Liberius, Dupin, to 
whom I have already alluded, admits, that it is doubtful whethei 
he subscribed the first or second confession of Sirmium ; but 
there is no question as to his having signed the condemnation 
of Athanasius, (2 vol. p. 62, 1697, 3d. ed. Lond. fol.) From 
his letter as given in Baronius and Hilary, it is evident that ho 
ratified the sentence passed by the Arians against Athanasius. — 
Baron. Tom. i, p. 939, ad. ann. 257, No 46, Mayence, 1601.— 
Liberius's letter is given in the fragm. of St. Hilary, vi, — Ex. 
oper. Hist. p. 1335, Benedict, edit. I ask my friend, if a 
Christian man, in the days of Liberius, was not called upon to 
stand alone against the whole word] Mr. Maguire has stated 
that, accoiding to my principles, the poor man is in a worse 
condition, than if his principles were adopted. He remarked, 
that if he could prove to the poor man the infallibility of his 
church, all h,^ difficulties would immediately vanish ? I reply, 
that in order to induce the poor man to believe that the church 
of Rome is infallible, Mr. Maguire must appeal to the Bible : 
and if the poor man should make objections to the inspired 
records, Mr. Maguire must explain to him every difficulty with 
which he may happen to charge the sacred page ; so that my 
opponent must convince him, that the Bible is the book of God, 
before he can possibly succeed in proving that the church of 
Rome is infallible. As to the poor Protestant who has received 
the knowledge of divine truth, though he may not bt^ able to 



192 THE JT ^TIFICATION OF ^ 

explain e\er} difliculty, yet is he convinced that the sacreo 
scriptures hav<' proceeded from heaven, because he himself haa 
experienced in his own soul their sanctifying influence, and haa 
the witness to their truth in himself. ' In the passaiie relative to 
Time jiy's having known the scriptures, Mr. Maguire has omit- 
ted ti e words, " that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly 
furnisi^d unto every good work." Now, I would ask, was 
Timo hy a clergyman while a child ? Was he a learned divine 
^hen he was a little boy? Was he like those which we have 
he ud described, beardless boys, exercising spiritual jurisdiction 
in the church of Rome, and arrogating authority over the bodies 
Wid souls of men ? Timothy read the Old Testament scrip- 
tures — R fortiori the scriptures of the New Testament should be 
read ; for, confessedly, the Old Testament is the more difficuh 
portion of the sacred volume. If St. Paul commends Timothy, 
that " from a child," " ano ^^fqpot-^," he knew the scriptures, 
does not .his fact supply us with an argument for placing the 
inspired records in the hands of the young ? But I must not 
forget that Mr. Maguire has said, that Timothy read the scrip- 
tures, as ihey were interpreted by the synagogue. Permit me 
to observe, that if Timothy had understood the scripture accord 
ing to the interpretation of the synagogue, he would have rejected 
the Messiah! 

My friend's comment on the words "in them you think you 
nave eternal life," is evidently at variance with the object which 
the Saviour had in view in making the observation : he intended 
to charge the Jews with practical inconsistency : — " Ye search 
the scriptures — in those scriptures ye believe that eternal life is 
contained, and they are they which testify of me, and yet, not- 
withstanding, ye will not come unto me, that ye may have life." 
l»Ir. Maguire has acknowledged, that a moral reformation was 
called for in the church of Rome, but says that I could not prove 
from Roman Catholic authorities, that a reformation in doctrine 
was required. It is altogether unreasonable to expect, that such 
an acknowledgement should be found in Roman Catholic di- 
vines. They judged according to their own standard of faith ; 
and if tney were consistent, they could not reject any doctrine 
advocated by the authority of their church. 

Cassander, indeed, remarks, in the passage already referred 
to, that 

" Ecclesiastics should set themselves, to correct manifest abuses according 
to th ! rule of dinne scHptureSj a id the primitive churchy from which thet 
HAVE SWERVED." — Consult. pp, 56, 57. 

Mr. Maguire has again said, no man can reform the church 
of Christ without performing miracles. He has again begged 
the question, by identifying the church of Home with the church 



THE REFORMATION. 19S 

of Christ. This day her doctrines have been contrasted with 
those contained in the sacred volume, and you will decido 
whether they accord. My opponent has observed that the 
Saviour stated, that the Scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses'3 
scat, and that he exhorted the people to hear them. But I 
would asl:, were they, therefore, infallible? Let any man ex- 
amine the gospels, and he will find that the outcry and opposition 
against the Redeemer were principally raised by them. They 
were to be heard, while reading the books of Moses, bu! not 
when uttering their own traditions, which the Saviour so pointedly 
condemned. The Jesuit Maldonate explains ihe passsage in 
(he same way ; indeed, it cannot with any possibility be other- 
wise expounded — 

" When Christ (saith he) bids observe, and do what the Scribes and Phari- 
seeft say, while they sii in Moses' seat, he speaks not of their doctrine, but of 
the doctrine of the law, and of Moses. For it is, as if he should say, ail things 
that the law and Moses shall say unto you, the Scribes and Pharisees rehears- 
ing it, observe and do, but after their works do not." — Maid, ad Matt, xxiii. 23. 

Mr. Maguire has adduced the opinion of Erasmus — now, as 
he died a Roman Catholic, Mr. Maguire will, perhaps, admit his 
opinion of Luther as a theologian : 

" There is more sound theology in one passage of his (Luther's) commen- 
taries than in many large volumes of the schoolmen and other such writers." 
And again, 

" I am more instructed and edified by one pagv. '^ Luther, than by the 
whole work of Aquinas." 

My opponent has remarked, that friars and priests by their 
learning became the authors of heresies. I would ask, is it the 
wish of my opponent that none should be learned, because 
learning has been abused ? I repeat a former observation, if 
<he abuse of the scriptures furnish a reason on account of which 
!hey should be withheld from any portion of mankind, they should 
be taken from priests and friars, who have perverted them, and 
given to ihe people who have never abused them. My friend has 
told as, that Christ came to reform the church. He came to 
give a fuller developement to revealed truth. The shadows of 
the Mosiac dispensation were to flee away, and the rays of 
divme light, which had pointed to Christ, were now to be c^n- 
centrated in him, as the sun of the system- The reformers, on 
the other hand, w^ere not to unfold a fuller dispensation, but to 
return to original principles. It was their's to remove the rub- 
bish which nearly overwhelmed the edifice of truth, and to lay 
it open to our view in the beauty of its original proportions. 
To employ an illustration, which has elsewhere been used — 
suppose a number of individuals had bound themselves by cer- 
tain laws, a copy of which was hung up for the view of the per- 
sons who composed the society. Abuses nowever grad ^Uy 

17 



|j^4 Jii£ JUSTIFICATION OF 

crept in, and the larger portion of the members succeeded ki( 
removing the table of laws. Should not the minority demands 
that the code of regulations should be again produced, and thai 
the system should be modelled afresh by the standard of recti- 
tude and truth ? Mr. Maguire has again introduced the doctrine 
of infalUbirty. Suppose that I should grant for a moment^ fcf 
argument's sake, that a man is convinced that the church j( 
Rome is infallible, (though I am most thoroughly persuaded that 
i^o infallible tribunal exists) of what benefit can .he supposed 
jifallibility of the church of Rome be to her votaries, if tM 
instrument or medium of conveying its decrees to them be not 
infallible also 1 The priest, in the interpretation of decrees and 
councils, must distinguish between what is to be rejected and 
what is to be received, and, if not infallible, may himself err. 
And, again, the individual to whom the priest addresses himself, 
may, if not infallible, misconceive his meaning, even though the 
priest should deliver the mind of his church aright. Mr. Maguire 
has referred to the Old Testament, to prove that disobedience to 
the voice of the priest was punished with death. My opponent 
should remember, that in Judea the law of God was the law of 
the land, Moses having dehvered as well the political as the 
moral law to the chosen people of God. The Jewish priest- 
hood were specially set apart for the study of that which at once 
was the rehgious and the civil polity of the Jews. In difficult 
cases the magistrate therefore appealed to their opinion, and 
their verdict decided the question. Government invests its 
judges with authority to put to death : we do not argue that they 
are consequently infallible. Though it be distinctly written, 
" the powers that be are ordained of God, and he that resisteth, 
shall receive to himself damnation," (Rom. xiii, 1,) it does not 
follow, that " the powers that be," are infallible. As to Herod's 
appeal to the priests, we may suppose that he was not acquainted 
with the prophecies. Did the Jewish teachers merely offer their 
own opinion on the subject of his inquiry ? No, they referred 
to the words of the prophet. 

[And applied them, observed Mr. Maguire ] 

Mr. Maguire has talked of the miracles of Xavier. I suppose 
that they may be paralleled with one recorded by a cardin&U 
We are told — 

" As St. Anthony was disputing concerning the truth of the Lord's body in 
the Eucharist with a heretic, the heretic required of Anthony this sign : Sayi 
the heretic, " I have a mule, to which I shall give no meat these three days. 
After the three day's end, come thou with the sacrament, and 1 will conrie 
with my mule, and will pour out provender before it ; if the mule leave hif 
provender, and come and venerate the aacrament, I will believe.' The86 
conditions were accepted, and after three days, St. Anthony approached, 
bringing the sacrament The mule forgetting his provender and his huuget, 



THE REFORMATION. a95 

iretit forthwith towan'/s the hand of sainted Anthony!!" — Bellarmine da 
tacram. Euchar. Hb. iii, cap. 8, prope finem. 

In reference to laymen, t would suggest to my friend, that in 
speaking of the superiority of Moses to Aaron, he should I ear 
in mind that Moses was a layman. We are told that Muses 
interceded for the people, so did Paul ; but though while they 
were on earth, they did so, does it follow that they do so now in 
heaven; if, while they could be seen, and while men could in 
per;K)n request them to pray in their behalf, they complied with 
thoir solicitations, does it follow that they pray for us now in 
heaven, or can hear our petitions there. I did not say that our 
Saviour did not Tefer to his miracles ; I stated that he appealed 
to the written word, as well as to his works, and not exclusively 
to the latter. I am asked, where was the church of Chr st 
before the Reformation ? I answer, the church of Christ is not 
confined to any one denomination. I hope that even now some 
of its members are to be found in the church of Rome : but 1 
would say to any such that may remain within her pale, 

" Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that 
ve receive not of her plagues." — Apocalypse, xviii, 4. 

The members of Christ's body were found protesting against 
the church of Rome long before the Reformation — the Wick- 
liffites in England, and the Bohemians and the Waldensea 
abroad. We shall show, upon Romar Catholic testimony, thai 
the principles of the Reformation were only the tenets of the 
Waldenses revived. Ecchius reproached Luther with renewing 
the heresies of the Waldciises. Lindanus, Roman Cathcli*: 
bishop of Ghent, (1650,) terms Calvin "the inheritor of the 
doctrine of the Waldenses." Mezeray, the celebrated historio- 
grapher of France, in his abridgment of Chronology, says — - 
" The Waldenses held nearly the same opinions as those who 
are now called Calvinists." 

Let us now determine the antiquity of the Waldenses upon 
Roman Catholic authority. Reinerius Saccho, an inquisitor, 
and the most inveterate enemy of the Waldenses, gives the 
following account of them : 

"Inter omnes has sectas, quae adhuc sunt, vel fuerMut, non est p^rniciosioi 
ei'clesiae quam Leonistarum; et hoc tribus de causis; prima est, quia est 
diiturnior; alique enim dicunt, quod duravit 4 tempore Sylvestri; aliqui fi 
tompore Apostolorum. Secunda, quia est generalior; fere enim nulla est 
terra, in qua haec secta non est. Tertia, quia cum omnes aliss sectae, imma- 
Litate blasphemiarun in Deum, andientibus horrorem inducunt,h8ec magnum 
habet speciem pietatis, eo quod coram hominibus justi vivant, et bene omnia 
de Deo credant, et omnes articulos qui in symbolo continentur; solummodo 
Romanum Ecclesiam blasphemant et clcrum." 

" Among all the sects (there were sects, you perceive, before the Retorma- 

tion,) which still are, or have been, there is not one more pernicious to the 

-ehorch than that of the Leonitee; (a name by which the Waldensep wer« 



/96 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

«ometi<ne8 cal cd) and that for three reasons. The first is, baiause it is tha 
dldest, for some say it hath endured from the time of Pope Silvester; others, 
from the time of the Jlpostles. The second, because it is more creneral, for 
there is scarce any country where this sect is not. The third, because when 
all other sects beget horror by their blasphemies against God, this of tn« 
Leonites hath a great show of piety, because they live justly before men, ard 
believe all things rightly concernmg God, and all the articles contained in 
the creed." 

What then was the head and front of their offending ? Reiner 
rius adds, 

"Only they blaspheme the church of Rome and the clergy." — (Rem. 
Saccho. edit. Gretzer, O. S. J. cap. iv, p. 54.) 

I shall lay before you another testimony. When some car- 
dinals and prelates accused the Waldenses in Merindol and 
Cabriers, of grievous crimes, and urged Lewis XII, to root 
them out ; the Waldenses, having notice thereof, sent their 
deputies to his majesty to declare their innocence. The pre- 
lates were instant upon the king, not to give them any audience; 
but the king answered, that if he were to make war against the 
Turk, he would previously hear him. The king accordingly 
sent Adam Fume, his master of requests, and doctor Parvi, b^s 
confessor, to search and inquire both into their life and religion. 
The commissioners visited those places, and upon their return, 
reported to the king the result of their examination, namely — 

" That men were baptized — the articles of faith, and the ten command- 
ments were taught — the Lord's day observed — the word of God preached, 
and no show of wickedness or fornication to be perceived amongst them : 
but that they found not any irrmges in their churches, nor any ornamenta 
belonging to the mass." 

The king hearing this report of the commissioners, said, (and 
h»*. bound it with an oath) " That they were better men than Ac, Of 
^e rest of his Catholic subjects.^^ 

" Tumrex etiamsi, inquit, nihi in Turcam aut diabolum bellum suscipiendum 
3sset cos tamen prius audire vellem." — Wesembecii Oratio de Valdens, u. 
418, extat in Joach. Camerarii Histor. Narrations de Fratrum. Orthod. Ecc' 
in Bohemia. 

"Illi ad regem referunt, illis in locis homines baptizari, articulos fidf ^f 
decalogum doceri, dominicos dies religiose coli, Dei verbum exponi, venefio^a 
et stupra apud eos nulla esse. His auditis rex, Jurejunando addito, me, 
inquit, et cetero popula meo Catholico meliores illi viri sunt" — Ibid. p. 419. 

"Ceterum se m ipsorum tempHs neque imagines neque ornamenta mis?** 
ol ja reperisse." — Ibid. 

When, therefore, I am asked, where was your religion before 
the days of Luther, though I might point to the Bible and answr 
»* in the Bible," — as God did not leave himself without witnesses, 
I can refer to the W^aldenses, and trace their origin up to a 
period, vhen, comparatively speaking, the church was in a state 
of purity. Faber, in his Difficulties of Romanism, has rhal- 
len^iBd any Roman Catholic divine, undertaking to show from 



THE REFORMATION. !97 

ftje early Fatheis, that the doctrines of the primitive church wem 
in accordance with the doctrines of Protestantism. 

I have called upon my friend to bring forward his proofg 
against the justification of the Reformation — now, perhaps, we 
shall nave a flourish of trumpets. I have stated, that hie separ^ 
ation was imperatively called for by the moral debasement and 
unscriptural doctrines of the church of Rome — still I would say 
come to the question ; disprove, Mr. Maguire, if you can, the 
immoral condition of the church of Rome, and the unscriptural 
character of her doctrines. On these grounds, I repeat, the 
reformers were justified in separating from her communion ; 
show that they werfe not justified in that separation. I am con- 
vinced that you will not be able to do so. Then let the empire 
give in its verdict, that the Reformation was called for by the 
moral degradation, and by the anti-scriptural doctrines of the 
church of Rome. 

Mr. Maguire. — Mr. Pope has talked of a challenge published 
by a Mr. Faber. I imagined they had not a greater man to 
produce on the other side than Mr. Pope himself; and when I 
joined issue with him, I supposed that I had to contend against 
the best advocate of their cause. I may remark, that 1 have 
not stood up here for the infallibility of the Pope. If Liberiua 
did ^ign the confession of Sirmium, which Mr. Pope has not 
proved, it was on being freed from long confinement, and from 
suffering. Mr. Pope has not extricated himself from the dilemma 
in which I involved him, as to the power of an ignorant Protestant 
to make an act of faith upon the inspiration of the scriptures. 
How can the Protestant free himself from doubts ? He has no 
means of solving all the difficulties connected with the scriptures. 
He must remove them through the instrumentality of private 
judgment, or be a deist, or an atheist. When I produced the 
authority of the holy Fathers of the early ages, to prove that the 
Bible is the word of God, I did not contradict my piinciples; 
but Mr. Pope violates his principles, when he adduces authority 
to satisfy the doubting Protestant. I have put certain queries 
to Mr. Pope, and I cannot prevail upon him even to attempt an 
answer to them, Mr. Pope has talked of the Son of God having 
left the perfect scriptures to man. I have to complain, thfit Mr. 
Pope puts into my mouth doctrines, whicli I by no means enter- 
tain. I consider that the scriptures, as far as they go, contain 
X rule and system of perfect morality. The scriptuies I study 
and revere: but I abhor the principle which would convert the 
scriptures into imtruments of infidelity. I maintain, that we 
should not be allowed to abuse those scriptures which Christ 
ieO to his church. Christ did not leave them to be iuif'rpreted 

n* 



198 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

^ ' the varying and capricious judgment of each individual, bul 
to be read according to the interpretation of his church. Every 
man possesses a divine right to read the scriptures in the three 
languages in which they were originally written, viz ; Hebrew, 
Greek, and Latin. These were the channels through which the 
pure scriptures were transmitted. But is a man to adopt the 
translations of Luther, of Calvin, and of other heretical reformers? 
Or docs it follow that the same divine right to read the scriptutes 
in the originals, can be transferred to varying ^nd variable trans- 
lations 1 I could prove that CEcolampadius corrupted the scrip- 
tures in more than one thousand places. Again, if Luther and 
Calvan were justified in their conduct, the same principle would 
^ustify Arius, Cerinthus, Eutychius, Manicheus, Montanus, the 
Muggletonians, &c, &c. The same principle would justify 
Mr. Pope in reforming the church of England — taking away 
twenty-one out of her thirty-nine articles, demolishing her spiritual 
authority, abolishing her prelates and pastors (whose succession 
is derived from the church which Protestants refuse to acknow- 
ledge) and, in fine, a similar principle would justify Mr. Pope in 
tearing up the church of England by the roots. But it would 
be an endless task, to endeavour to enumerate the sects and 
divisions to which that principle has given, and must continue 
to give origin. These endless sects were well described by 
Bossuet, in his History of the Protestant Variations. He says, 
" The raging sea is not furrowed by more waves, nor does the 
uncultivated land produce more thistles and thorns, thaL the 
Reformation has produced religions, since the epoch of its 
introduction.'^ 

If the principle, that every man has a right to reform Ae 
:jhurch be once proclaimed, a reformation of the church of 
England will necessarily follow. It will be soon discovered 
that she can be approximated to a more perfect standard of 
evangelical perfection — I, by the same principle may commence 
reformer of the church of England, by asserting that her scrip- 
tures are not all pure, and I may strike off several books from 
the canonical list, and would I not have as clear and as undoubted 
a right to do so, as Mr. Pope has to reject what he calls the 
Apocrypha. In fine, if one man rejected one part, and another 
another part, would not the consequence be, that the whole BibU 
would become guestionable at last. 

Mr. Pope talks of some loose and immoral charac.ers, mem* 
bers oC the Roman Catholic church. Have I not forborne to 
to mention a quondam Protestant Bishop of Waterford, ano 
another bishop of more recent notoriety. 

Suppose I proclaim a complete reformation of the church of 
England, what right would Mr. Pope possess to call me to af 



THE REFORMATION. 199 

account? I would say, that her rich, and gorgeous, an J pam- 
pered hierarchy, ill accorded with the doctrines of the humble 
Redeemer — I would say, that in this country particularly, she 
took every thing from the poor, and gave them nothing in return. 
Would Mr. Pope call me to order? Every man according to 
his principles, has a right to preach. Here is Mr. Pope himself 
almost a layman, teaching and preaching to ecclesiastics. 

I shall now give you Luther's character as drawn by himself 
He sketches his own portrait in better and truer colours, 1 fancj 
and more \o the life, than if he had sat for it to the best literar;y 
limner in existence. I have here the German text, and it ia 
from the translation of it, I shall select the following passages : 

"I, Martin Luther, as to those matters (matters of faith) am, and wish tc 
be deemed obstinate, contumacious, and violent; and let diis be my creed, 1 
yield to no man." 

"I am a doctor above all doctors, and an unworthy evangelist of our Lord 
»<csus ChrisL I, Martin Luther, by the grace of God, evangelist of Wittem* 
bergh. I, Doctor Martin Luther, am your Apostle, I am a prophet, I am 
Isaiah, to the honour of God and to the confusion of the devil. A second 
John the Baptist — a great hero — a most rare man — such as has not existed 
/or many ages — I am a saint of God. My mouth is the mouth of Christ 

—I AM not far from THINKING MYSELF A GoD ! !" 

" May thunder and lightning — hell's fire and brimstone, plagues, and every 
dirty and filthy evil fall upon the two twins of the devil, the Pope and his 
cardinals." 

He calls Henry the eighth of England, 

"A fool" — "a madman" — "a lunatic" — a monster of insanity" — "an 
ass" — " a hog" — " a log" — " a knave" — " a devil" — " an imp" — " a robber." 

He calls Hemy, Duke of Brunswick, 

"x\ buffoon" — "a blackguard" — "an idiot' — "a lecher" — and "an 
effeminate." 

He sacrilegiously added the word " only" to the text of St, 
Paul, respecting justification by faith ; and when upbraided with 
the corruption, he replied, 

"If any papist shall start up against this word only, immediately oppose 
him th : will of Dr. Martin Luther, who asserts that the Pope and an ass are 
one an : the same thing, (quid unum et idem) and who is a doctor above al] 
Popes and doctors." 

Again, he says, 

" In studying the scriptures, follow this rule — if you perceive any command 
ili the scriptures about performing good works, understand such command 
lobe a prohibition against the performance of good loorkSy for this reason, that 
every man is incapable of doing a good work." 

Again, of these words of Christ to his Apostles — <• Ye are the 
light of the world." Luther makes the following version — voi 
estis stircus in laterna — " Ye are filth in a lantern." Again, 

"Christ in the hearts of papists, is nothing but a mere fiction — a pagjn 
idol He who believes in Christ will be damned according to papists. li 
Chnst be truly Christ, then monks and nuns cannot be Christians." 



200 TH" JU5TIFICATI01S OF 

"In two years' time, my gospel will be so diffused, tha the Pope, and hn 
bishops, and priests, and monks, and nuns, and bells, and towers, and cella, 
ind the mass, will be no more heard of; in short, there will be an end ot 
Popery altogether." 

"A pious man sinneth in every good work, A good work, no mattes 

HOW WELL PERFORMED, IS, NEVERTHELESS, A DKAD^LY SIN. He who be- 

heveth, can neither be a sinner, nor an adulterer. I find nothing pure or holy 
either in myself, or in all mankind, and all our good works are like lice on 
an old skin." 

To his wife Catherine, whom he seduced from her three vowi 
of poverty, chastity, and obedience, he says, 

" As it is not in my power, who am a man, to become a woman, nor in 
your power, who art a woman, to become a man ; so neither is it in iiy 
power to do without a woman, nor in your's to do without a man." 

As to his contradictory doctrines, the following are a few, out 

of many hundred specimens : 

" I believe in purgatory, and I know it to be true that souls are tortured 
there, and may be relieved by prayers, fasting, and alms." 

And in another place, he says, 

" 1 confidently assert that purgatory, with all its ceremonies and mimio 
worship, is a diabolical crime, as being diametrically opposed to that cardinal 
article, that the salvation of souls rests upon the merits of Christ, and nd 
of men." 

Again, he says, 

"Whoever preaches against the doctnne of pontifical indulgences, let him 
be accursed." And — 

" The indulgences which are practised m the Roman church are execrable 
frauds." 

" Above all things it is necessary, and the scripture itself plainly teaches, 
that God wishes all voivs tc be fuljilled.^^ Again — 

"I wish I could persuade all mankind that all vows of whatsoever descrip- 
tion, should be despised, and that every person should enjoy the liberty of 
the gospel." 

"Let us abstain from all sins, but in particular from all good works, for all 
the good loorks we perform are dead^ 

"It is impossible for us to resist the slighest temptation to sin, and the scrip- 
ture itself teaches that we are slaves of the devil, and as it were the subject! 
of God our prince." 

"w3 vow of chastity is worse than adultery and impurity.'*'' 

" It is not so much my desire to demonstrate how chastity is to be observed^ 
but that it is impossible, and ought not to be observed." 

"If any one shall correct you for speaking smuttily, let this be your repljr 
—What then ? If the whole world be offended, we must obey necessity." 

"If Huss was a heretic, I will be ten times a greater one." 

"I am often in doubt whether I teach the truth or not" 

"This thing (the Reformation) neither commenced on God's account, hii 
mil it end on God's account. 

He had also the sacrilegious audacity to corrup the Apostles 
treed, where, instead of " I believe the Cath^^lic church," hi 
iubstitutes, " I believe the Christian church," well judging tha/ 
he had no claim to Catholicity 



THE REFORMATION. 201 

He also confesses, that he eat a bushel jf «alt with the devil 
—that he slept oftener with him than with his wife Catherine — 
fli-it when he had not the devil appended about his neck, he was 
a mere dry theologian. — Vide Le Roj Labyrintho, cap. 13, et 
ip^um Lutherum, de Missa Angulari, CoUoquia mensalia, et 
Tomun— 7 vol. 228. 

If the foregoing extracts from Luther's works be genuine, and 
I challenge inquiry on the subject, I put this single question— 
w('uld the Almighty and all- wise God employ such an instrument 
to reform his church ? 

Again in his book De Missa Prii aia^ (von dei Winckelmesz,) 
ha acknowledges and describes at large his famous conference 
with the devil, in which he confesses to have been prevailed 
upon by his satanic majesty to abrogate private masses — the 
arguments employed by the devil were five in number. The 
Work in which this conference is to be found, was written in 
German by Luther's own hand, and translated into Latin at 
Luther's own request, by Justus Jonas. See also Tanner in 
his Anatomy of Luther. 

Such, Gentlemen, were the doctrines of this arch-reformer, 
and Protestant Apostle, derived, if we can believe himself, from 
the devil, the father of lies. My learned friend sometimes differs 
from Luther — Luther from my learned friend — which of thcni 
will you follow 1 

Luther thus, thrasonically, expresses himself elsewhere — 

* Here I stand— here I sit — here I remain — here I boast — here I triumph- 
here I insult the papists, the Thomists, the Henry cists, the Sophists, and all 
the gates of hell — yea, and all the words of men, no matter how sanctifieo. 
The divine Majesty has enabled me to set at nought a thousand Augustin's, 
I thousand Cyprians, though they should stand up against m<d." 

The two following brief quotations from Luther I dare not 
translate : 

"dui Diabolum novit Confidenler ei dicit, /am6c, mihi nates; — crer*t>:a 
?enlris longius fugat Diabolum quam sacra scriptura ! !" 

The abov 3 are to be seen by any inquirer in the original 
German. 

Dr. Heylin, a most learned Protestant historian, gives the 
fcilo\*ing account of the introduction of the new Lutheran doc 
tilnes into Dantzick (in his Cosmogony, p. 148 :) 

"Danlzick was the first town in the kingdom of Poland which gave en 
trance lo the dv)ctrines of Luther, Anno 1525, but in so tumultuous a manner, 
that they who lavoured his opinions, deposed the old common-council men. 
and created new ones of their own — prophaned the Churches^ robbed them or 
their ornaments, and shamefully abusea the priests and religious persons? — 
abolished the mass — and altered all things at their pleasure. But by th« 
commg of the King, they grew somewhat quieter, lea^mg tlie convent oi 
Black Friars to two nuns, who still enjoy the exercise of their religion" 



202 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 

The sBL^c writer sa3^s, (Ibidem, Book II, pag« 36.) 

" Whilst the Lutherans were thus playing their game, there started up 
Another party, begun at first by Zuinglius, amongst the Switzers. These, 
not communicating councils, went two different ways, especially in the points 
of consubstantiation and the real presence. Not reconciled in their times, 
nor like to be agreed upon by tlieir followers. For Calvin, rising into the 
esteem and pl-ace of Zuinglius, added some texts of his own to the former 
doctrines, touching predestination, free-will, &c, by which the differences 
were widened, and the breach made irreparable: this course being followed 
on CRch sfde with great impatience, as if they did not strive so much for truth 
MS tictnii^.'*' 

Agairky the sr^me vv'riter says, (page 136.) 

"In the V'iar 1528, religion being altered, in a tumult of the people in the 
Jaiton of Beine, near adjoining to Geneva, Viret and Farrellus, two Zuing- 
tian preachers, did endeavour it in Geneva also. But finding that the bishop 
and clergy did not like their doings, they screwed themselves into the people, 
and by their aid, in a popular tumult, compelled the bishop and his clergy to 
abandon the town. Nor did they only in that tumult alter the doctrine and 
orders of Che church before established, but changed the government of the 
state also, disclaiming all allegiance both to duke and bishop, and standing 
on their own liberty as a free commonwealth. And though all this was done 
by Viret and Farrellus, before Calvin's coming to that city, which was not 
till 1536, yet, being come, no man was forwarder than he to approve the 
zction. And that rather than their discipline should not be admitted, and the 
episcopal government destroyed in all the churches of Christ, they were 
resolved to depose kings, ruin kingdoms, and to subvert the fundamental con' 
stitution of all civil states.^^ 

It cannot be inappropriate to give a short account of these 
principal reformers. liUther was taken suddenly ill after eating 
a hearty supper, and died in the night. Zuinglius was killed in 
a rebellion excited by himself and his party, against the Catholic 
cantons, anno 1531. Qllcolampadius was found dead in his bed, 
before Luther met his fate ; the latter did not hesitate to declare, 
that he was strangled by the devil. — (Lib. de Miss. Priv. et 
Unit. Sacr. Tome vii, p. 250.) Calvin, in the year 1564, died 
of a dreadful complication of distempers, which Catholics and 
some Protestants assure us he bore so ill, that he expired in 
despair, blaspheming God, and invoking the devib. See Bol- 
Beck, in his book of Calvin's Life. — Schlusselburg\ a learned 
Lutheran, in Theol. Calviniana, printed anno 1594, p. 72. — 
Herenius, a Calvinistic preacher, declares, tha.' he was an eye 
witness of Calvin's tragical end, and that he d.'ed in despair, of a 
most filthy and stinking disease. — See his L^ber. de vita Calvini. 

The following testimony is given by Melarcthon to the char- 
acter of the reformers. It is taken from his Comm.entary on 
St. Matt. 6th ch. 

" It is plain, that in these countries (he speaks of the countries which em- 
braced Luther's reformation) men's whole concern is almost about banquet- 
ling, drunkenness, and carousing. And so strangely barbarous is the people, 
Uiat most men are persuaded that if they do but fast one day, they miist dif 
li?e following night." 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 203 

So you perceive, gentlemen, fasting was not then exploded. 
f may remark, in reference to some arguments of Mr. Pope on 
the subject, that the Albigenses and Waldenses retained to the 
last l\\€ sacrifice of the Mass. They, therefore, cannot be 
legitimately numbered amongst the reformers. I could quote 
many foul and scandalous passages from the works of Calvin, 
and other reformers, in proof of the happy improvement in 
moials and religion, which they introduced by throwing off tho 
yoke of what they called a superstition, and giving full scope tc 
(be licentious and desolating principles of the Reformation. 

Jacobus Andreas (in Luke 21) says, 

" The other part of the Germans, viz; the Protestants, give due place to 
tiie preaching of the word of God ; but no amendment of manners is found 
am( ng them ; on the contrary, we see them lead an abominable voluptuous 
beastly life; instead of fasts, they spend whole nights and days in revelry and 
drunkenness." 

Cranmer was a good example of the celibacy of the reformers — 
he brought his wife over with him in a chest to England, but 
through a mistake in the landing it, the sailors turned up the 
wrong end of the chest ; the consequence was, that its fair 
inmate was forced to cry out for relief, and the hypocrital hus- 
band was obliged to expose her to the public view. I have many 
other quotations here ; as to the character of the modern reform- 
ers, but I find I have not time at present to read them to you. 



Fifth Day — Tuesday, April 24. 



SUBJECT. — " The doctrine of Transubstantiatton.'' 
Admiral Oliver and John Dillon, Esq., in the Chair. 

Mr. Pope. — 1 beg to call upon Mr. Maguire for proofs of the 
doctrine of Transubstantiation. 

Ml Maguire. — Gentlemen, as i* was agreed upon yester- 
day, not to recur to the question of the Reformation, I shall at 
once pro eed to the very important subject of this day's discus* 
sion — namely, Transubstantiation. It is a question of the mosl 
solemn complexion, and I trust that although my friend Mr. 
Pope will be obhged, by his established principles to differ from 
me on this occasion, that he will indulge in no useless and pro- 
PHANE sarcasms against a doctrine which I shall prove to havp 
been openly established for eighteen hundred years. I sincerely 
trust, that in the < ourse of this day's discussion, my friend wUi 



204 THE DOCTRINE OF TRAN9U 3STAN TIATION. 

not make use of any expression, whicb would be, according ta 
my principles, an absolute blasphemy against the Son of God. 
If the doctrine which i undertake to defend be that which was 
weached by the Apostles and received by them from Christ, then 
it would be manifest blasphemy to utter any sarcasm against 
this great and fundamental lenet. Betore I enter upon my direct 
proofs, I shall beg leave to draw your attention to one important 
fact. We are told that Melchisedech, a priest of the Most High, 
' made an offering of bread and wine ;" and St. Paul assures 
us that Christ " was a high priest for ever according to the order 
of M.elchesidech,'*^ Now, if the same offering or sacrifice be 
not continued till the consummation of ages, Christ could not 
be a priest ybr ever according to the order of Melchesidech. I 
could prepare your minds with further prefatory observations, 
but the dogma which I maintain is so clear and so sustainable, 
that I proceed at once to my direct arguments. 

First, then, I refer you to the sixth chapter of St. John, where 
our Saviour draws a comparison between the bread which he 
promised to bequeath for the life of the world and the manna 
which came down from heaven to feed the distressed Israelites. 

"The bread (said he) that I will give you, is v\y flesh for the life of the 
world. Your Fathers did eat manna in the dfs;rt, and are dead; if any 
man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever." 

Our Redeemer here extols what he was about to give at his 
last supper, far beyond the bread which we know descended 
from heaven. Now, in my mind, the latter would have been 
far superior to the former, if our Saviour had left us nothing but 
a bit of bread and a drop of wine. Many of those who were 
present, and some of them his disciples, were shocked at the 
expression, and they asked how was it possible that he could 
give them his flesh to eat? What was the conduct then of our 
Lord who came to instruct all unto salvation, and who neither 
could deceive nor be deceived 1 Instead of representing to them 
their mistake or correcting their error, if it were one, he says, 

" Amen, Amen, I say unto you ; unless you eat the flesh of the Son of 
Man. and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you." 

x\t this, many of his disciples who followed him through all 
Jangers and persecutions, all those who were about him from 
(Japernaum \ieni back^ and walked no longer with him. Would 
ne, the benign and beneficent Jesus, who had descended upon 
earth to lead man from sin, and who was about to offer himself 
upon the cross for man's redemption, would he suffer those per* 
sons to depart, believing that he spoke of a reality, and not 
explain to them their error, if indeed, it were an error? Would 
he have suffered them to fall innocently into error, when he could 
nave so easily corrected their misapprehension? I ask ant 



THE DCC7RINE OF TR INS UBS TANTl ATION. 205 

easonable man, had not the people of Capernaum, in whos« 
vernacular language (the Syriac) our Lord then spoke, a better 
opportunity of knowing the meaning of the words of our Saviour 
on this occasion, than we who live at the distance of eighteeij 
hundred years, whose habits and language are confessedly dif- 
ff rent? When our Lord declared, " the bread that I will give is 
my flesh for the life of the world," they then understood Jesus 
to speak of real flesh and real blood; and accordingly they walked 
no longer with him. He did not correct their error, if such it 
were. What more easy for him than to say, (if that were his 
meaning) that he did not intend to give tliem his real flesh and 
blvX)d — that he only spoke in a figurative sense? But Jesus 
made no such correction. If it were not his real body and 
blood of which Christ then spoke, he led those people into error: 
but that supposition is manifest blasphemy. Hence I conclude, 
that the Jews were right when they understood him to speak of 
his real body and real blood. It may )e said that the error of his 
disciples, and of the people of Capernaum, was one which Christ 
was not obliged to correct. But, as St. Augustin remarks, 
though the Jews in a gross and carnal manner understood him 
to mean that he would give his flesh to them like meat taken 
^rom a butchefs stalls yet they understood him to speak of a 
reality ; and if he did not mean to give them his flesh really, the 
error could have been easily corrected. But Christ was not 
called upon to tell them how it would be really given — that being 
a secret not to be communicated till the period of redemption 
was arrived. That, indeed, would be exposing the mysteries of 
heaven before the time. This argument appears to me to be 
insuperable. I will be told, in the language of Christ : " It is 
the spirit that quickeneth ; the flesh profiteth nothing." I will 
show greater authority for my interpretation of those words than 
they can, who endeavour to explain away the words of our 
Saviour. I can produce the passages in the holy Fathers, in 
which they quote those identical words in order to show their 
meaning. We, who admit the real presence, hold, that those 
who receive Christ in the sacrament of the altar, if they do not 
receive the sacrament worthily and with the proper dispositions^ 
do not receive with it the spirit of God — that though they receive 
the substance of the sacrament, the flesh doth not profit them. 
Hear what St. Paul says, 

"He that eateth and diinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment 
to himself, not diacerning the body of the Lord." 

But it is behind the sacred words of eternal truth, fulfilled and 
verified by Christ at the last supper, that I take my stand. Upon 
them I erect irrefragable proofs. — What Christ promised in the 
«ixth chapter of St, John, he fulfilled at his last supper. Whea 

18 



206 THE DOCTRINE OF TRaNSIjBSTANTIATION. 

Boleinnly seated at the board with his chosen twelve, he took 
bread, blessed it, broke it, and gave it to tht*m saying, " Take 
ye and eat, this is my body." — And presenting them with the 
chahce, he said, " Drink ye all of this, for this is my blood of 
the New Testament, which shall be shed for many for the 
remission of sins." What Christ then promised in the sixth '^f 
John, he here fulfilled to the letter, and must we not take his 
words in their natural and obvious sense ? Shall we resort to 
tropes, and figures, and metaphors, in order to explain away the 
won! of ihe Lord? If Mr. Pope exercises his private judg 
meiit on the passage, and pertinaciously adheres to his inter 
pretation of the words, it is impossible we could agree upon the 
matter. 1 adhere firmly and steadily to the doctrine of the 
church. Look to the primitive ages of Christianity — examine 
the successors of the Apostles, who believed and taught what 
was believed and taught by the Apostles themselves, and who 
transmitted the doctrines to their successors. They are all in 
support of the doctrine of transubstantiation. I shall first quote 
the passage from St. Cyril of Jerusalem, in his Mystagog. Cat. 
4, where taking as his text the words of St. Paul, " For I re- 
ceived of the Lord that which I also have delivered unto you," 
speaks thus of the real presence and of transubstantiation. 

"This doctrine of the blessed Paul may be sufficient to satisfy you con- 
cerning the divine mysteries which you have received, that you have been 
made partakers of the body and blood of Christ ; for he now says, that our 
Lord Jesus Christ in the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread, 
and gave it to his disciples, saymg, 'Take, eat; this is my body.' And 
taking the chalice, and giving thanks, said, * Take, drink ; this is my blood.' 
Since Christ himself, then, did so affirm, and say of the bread, *This is my 
body,' who shall from thenceforth presume to make any doubt of it ? And since 
he affirms and says, * This is my blood,' who, I say, shall doubt, and say it is 
not his blood? He once changed water into wine (which has some likeness 
!j blood) in Cana of Galilee, by his own power; and shall he not be thought 
*\'orthy of belief in changing wine into blood ? Being invited to an earthly 
marriage, he wrought this stupendous miracle, and shall we not much rather 
confess, that he gave his oton body and blood to the children of the bridegroom? 
Therefore, with full assurance let us receive the body and blood of Chrict. 
For under the type (or appearance) of bread the body is given unto thee, and 
under the type of wine the blood ; that receiving the body and blood of 
CbrVf^ thou mayest be co-partner with him of his body and blood; so ?hall we 
k-' Christephori, carriers of Christ, when we receive his body and blood into 
oui n^'.mbers ; and by this means (as St. Peter saith) be made partakers of 
the di\ine natuie. Do not consider them as uaked bread and naked vdne, for 
it u the body and blood of Christ, according to the words of our Lord himself) 
For though your senses shoidd suggest this to you, yet let faith confirm you,-' 
Judge not of the thing by the taste, but rather be more certainly assured bj 
faith, so as to leave no room for a doubt but that the body and blood are 
given to thee. This knowing, and of this being assured, that what appeara 
w> you bread is not bread, but the body of Christ, althiugh the taste judges U 
to be bread; and that the wine which you see, and which has the taste oj wint,^ 
i$ not wine, but the blood of Christ — * Taste and see hoto stveet the Lord M.* 
Thitik you, now, that you are required to discern this by the sense of taste f 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTI ATION. £07 

No^ by no means, but by the testimony of faith, which is certain, and leavei 
no doubt. — For when you take them, you are not commanded to take bread 
and wine, but under the appearance of these, to take the body and biood ol 
Christ." 

St. Chrysostom, in his 83d Homily on the 26th chapter ol 
Matthew, tome 7, raaintains the same doctrine. 

"Let us, (says he) beheve God in every thing, and not gainsay him, Llthoiigb 
what is said may seem contrary to our reason and our sight. Let his word 
overpower both. Thus let us do in mysteries^ not looking only on the things 
that he before us, but holditjg fast his words ; for his word cannot deceive, 
but our sense is very easily deceived. That never faileth — this often. Since, 
then, his word says, ' This is my body,^ let us assent and believe and view it 
with the eyes of our understanding. Christ left to us nothing sensible, but 
things intellectual^ under sensible forms. Thus the blessing of baptism is 
^iven by water, which is corporeal ; but what is done by it — namely, regen- 
eration and renovation, is incorporeal or intellectual. If you were incorporeal^ 
he would have bequeathed to you gifts purely incorporeal ; but as your soul 
s united to a body, those gifts are to be comprehended under corporeal ^gns. 
How many persons are heard to say, I would willingly behold his figure, his 
ihape, his attire ! But thou seest him — thou touchest liim — thou receivest him 
nto thy breast ; yet thou desirest to see his garments. He gives himself tc 
thee, not to be looked upon only, but to be touched, to be eaten, to be admit- 
ted into thy breast. These are not the works of human power. He who in 
that supper made these things himself now also does them for you. We hold 
the order of ministers, but the sanctijier and changer of them is Himself; who 
will give us of his Jiesh that we may be filled. — (Job, xxxi, 31.) This Christ 
has done — not only allowing himself to be seen, but to be touched too, and 
to be eaten, and teeth to pierce his flesh, and all to be filled with the love ot 
him. Parents often give their children to be nourished by others; not so I, 
says Christ ; but I nourish you with my flesh, and I place myself before you. 
I was willing to become your brother ; for the sake of you I took flesh and 
blood, and again I delivered to you that flesh and blood by which 1 became 
8o related."— (Horn. 24, in Joan, i, 5, p. 292.) 

" What sayest thou. O blessed Paul ? WiUing to impress on thehearLr, 
and making mention of the tremenduous mysteries, thou callest them the cup 
of benediction." — (1st Corinth, x, 16.) 

" That terrible and tremendous cup — that which is in the cup is that which 
iowedfrom his side, and we partake of it. It is not of the altar, but of Christ 
himself we partake ; let us therefore approach to him with all reverence and 
purity; and when thou beholdest the body lying before thee say to thyself, by 
this body I am no longer earth and ashes. This is that very body ichich bled, 
which was pierced by the lance.'''' — (Hom. 24, in Ep. ad Cor. i, 10.) 

" He that was present at the last supper, is the same who is now present, 
and consecrates our feast : for it is not man who makes the things lying on the 
gltar BECOME THE BODY AND BLOOD OF Christ, but that ChHst who was 
trucified for us. The loords are pronounced by the priest, but it is the pc»wei 
and grace of God that consecrates them. He said, * this is my bo<ly,' thtse 
loords make the ckange.^^ — Hom. De Prodit. Juda;. t. v. page 415.) 

" As many partake of this body, as many taste of this blood, thin> it 
nothing different from that which sits above, and is adored by angels."-— 
(Horn. 3, ad Ephs. Tome 10.) 

" This table supplies the place of the manger ; for ewen here shall lie ihe 
body of our Lord, not wrapped in swaddling clothes, as then, but surrounded 
on all sides by the Holy Spirit. They that are initiated understand thesf 
things. The magi, or wise men d'd nothing but adore ; but thou, if thou 
comest with a pure conscience, wilt be permitted to take him to thtselv.* 
'Oiut De S riiilogonio t ii, p. 3.S7.) 



SOS THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATIOJft. 

" The servants of Job, to show their love for him, said, * who will give ut 
of his flesh that we may be filled.' — (xxxi, 3J.) In like manner Christ gave 
us hisjiesh that with it, we may be filled and inflamed with the love of hiiUi 
'Ihisbody lying in the n}anger, the wise men reverenced, seeing no such thing 
as thou seest ; thou dost no see him in the manger, but on the altar — nor dost 
thou only see him, but moreover thou touchest him — Ihon eatest him. and 
returnest home with him in thy breast ; cleanse then, thy soul trom ail defile* 
nient, and prepare thyself to receive these mysteries.^^ — (Hom. 2^ In 1, 
Cor. ij 10.) 

" Wonderful ! ! The table is spread with mysteries, the Lamb c 3rod is 
slain for thee, and the spiritual blood flows from the sacred table. The 
apiritual fire comes down from heaven ; the blood in the chalice is drawn from 
the spotiess side, for thy purification. Thinkestthou that thou seest bread ?-- 
that thou seest wine ? — that these things pass off' as other foods do ? — far be 
it from thee to think so. But as wax, brought near to the fire, loses its for- 
mer substance, which no longer remains ; so do thou thus conclude that the 
mysteries (the bread and wine,) are consumed by the substance of the body ; 
wherefore approaching to them, think not that you receive divine body from a 
infUf but fire from the hand of a seraphim." — Hom. De Panitione sue d« 
Euchar. in Encoeniu. t. v, page 489. 

" Christ was not content to be made a man — to be scourged — but reduced 
us, as I may say, into one mass or lump with himself, and* this not only by 
faith, but in very deed, maketh us his own body. What ought then to b« 
purer than he who shall partake of the sacrifice. What rays of the sun oughi 
not those hands to exceed in brigfitness which handle this crown — that mouth 
which is filled with spiritual fire — that tongue which is bloody with this admi- 
ruble blood! Call to mind with what honour thou art dignified, of what table 
thou partakest. For we are/ec/ tvith that thing which, when the angels behold, 
they tremble. Neither can they without fear see, by reason of the ^lory which 
Cometh from thence; and we are reduced into one mass with him, Christ's 
body being one and his flesh one ; who shall declare the power of the Lord — 
who shall make known his praises ? What shepherd ever fed his sheep with 
his own members ? Many mothers, when they bring forth their children, 
give them to other nurses, this Christ would not do, but feeds us with hisoiun 
Draper body, and joins, and, as it were, glues us to himself" 

The following passage is taken from St. Augustin, in hia 
Enarration upon the 33d Psalm, commenting upon these words 
of the Septuagint : — *' Ferebatur in manibus suis," he says as 
plain as words can make it, that though David could not carry 
himself in his own hands, according to the letter^ yet the prophecy 
was accomplished literally in the person of Christ.'' The holy 
Father observes — 

" * Ferebatur in manibus suis.' — Hoc vero fratres quomodo possit fieri in 
homine? duis intelligat ? Ctuis enim portatur in manibus suis ? Manibus 
fdioruni potest portari homo — manibus suis nemo portatur. Cluomodo intelli- 
gatur in ipso Da vide secundum literam non invsinmus, in Christo autem i;ivcni- 
mus. Ferebatur enim Christus in manibus suis quando commendans ipsum 
Corpus suum, ait, hoc est Corpus meum—ferebat enim illud Corpus in mani- 
bus suis. * He was borne in his own hands.' * How this could be done by 
man, brethren, who can comprehend ? For what man is carried in his own 
hands ? Man can be carried in the hands of others — in his own hands no 
man is carried. How this can be understood of David to the letter we do 
not find, but in the person of Christ we find illiterally. For Christ was bonu 
m his own hands when commending his own proper body, he said, * this is inj 
Wody/ FOR HI CARRIED THAT BODT in h%s owu honds," 



THE DOCTRINE OF TR ANSUBTANTIATION. 2U9 

Some polemical srnatterers have endeavoured to evade ihis 
manifest argument, by observing that Christ might carry his body 
in his hands^ as a king or prince might carry his own picture ; 
but the difference betvveen these feeble disjutants and St. Augus- 
tin is, that St. x\ugustin held and believed Christ to have carried 
in his hands, his own iruCy real, and substantial body, which he 
affirms, no mere mortal could effectuate ; whereas, according to 
those gentlemen, Christ only did what every man could easily per- 
form — carry about his body figuratively — representatively, &c. 

St. Augustin Concione in Psalmum, 33, thus writes : — 

" 'Inhere was, you are all aware, first the sacrifice of the Jews, which con- 
sisted in victims of cattle, and that in a mystery. The sacrifice of the body 
and blood of our Lord which the faithful know who read the gospel, but 
which all do not know, and which it were to be wished some did not know to 
their condemnation, was not then instituted, which sacrifice is now estabhshed 
all over the world." 

Again in Lib. 22, De Civit Dei. cap. iii, he relates the follow- 
ing fact : 

" A certain man called Hesperius of the Tribunitial order, who still liveth 
convenient to us, hath a little farm called Zubedi in the territories of Fusali, 
which he having believed by the injury done his servants and cattle to he ha.\m' 
ted with evil spirits, besought my priests in my absence that one of them 
should go thither and expel them by prayers ; one accordingly went — offered 
there the sacrifice of Christ's body, praying with all his might that this evil 
would cease, and by the mercy of God it did cease." 

The above passage, you will perceive, establishes not only the 
doctrine of Transubstantiation, but also the holy sacrifice of the 
Mass. — Were a priest of the present day to offer up the sacri« 
iice of the Mass for the expulsion of evil spirits, and the preser 
vation of c-^ttle, what an outcry would be raised by the "Saints" 
against him, as if the practice were idolatrous, superstitious, and 
damnahle. 

" Christ took upon him earth from the earth, because his flesh is from the 
flesh of Mary, and because he here walked in this flesh, even this same flesh 
he gave to us to eat for our salvation : but no one eateth this flesh without 
ha,ying first adored it : and not only do we not sin by adoring it, but we sin 
by not adoring it. But is it the flesh that quickeneth ? The Lord in e:xalting 
this earth to us, informs us that it is the spirit that quickeneth— the flesh profiteih 
nothing. Wherefore, in abasing yourself and in casting yourself down before 
any matter whatever, consider it not as matter, but consider in it that holy one 
of whom the body which you adored is the footstool. For it is for his sake 
that you adore it." — In Psal. 9S. 

" The man Jesus Christ, though in the form of God, he receive sacrifice 
win ni3 Father, yet in the form of a servant he chose rather to be himself a 
sacrifice, than to receive it — thus he is the priest, himself offering, and himseli 
Ihe victim.'' — De Civit. Del. Lib. x. 

Speaking of the Jews converted by St. Peter, he says, 

" They were converted, they were baptized, they approached the table of 
the Lord, and now believing they drank that blood which in their rage thei 
bad shed." — Sermo 76. De verb. Evangel. I, v, Ed. Bened. 

18* 



210 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTI ATION. 

•* We receive with a faithful heart and mouth, the Mediator «»f God i.ti4 
man — the man Christ Jesus, who has given us his body to eat, ar<d his blood 
to drink ; although it may appear more horrible to eat the flesh of a man than 
to destroy it, and to drink human blood than to spill it." 

Sf Hilary in his eighth book on the Trinity — 

" Therefore, If Christ did truly take to himself the flesh of our body, and 
Cirtat this man who was born of IVlary is truly Christ, and that we truly taka 
under a mystery or ved the flesh of his body, and by this w^ll be one with him 
because the Father is in him, and he in us ; how is the unity of K;i// asferted, 
iince the natural propriety by the sacrament is a sacrament of perfect unity f 
We must not speak with human or worldly sense of the things of God. Let 
OS read the things that are written and understand what we read, and then W8 
«hall discharge the office of perfect faith. For what we say of the natural 
truth of Christ in us, unless we learn it from himself, we foolishly and impi- 
ously say. For he saith, ^viy flesh is truly food and my blood is truly drink /' 
^here is no room left to doubt of the truth of his flesh and blood : for now 
both by the decluration of our Lord himself and by our faith, it is truly flesh 
And truly blood." 

St. Augustin, in his 27th tract upon St. John, commenting on 
the words, " the flesh profiteth nothing" — thus argues : 

" What means 'the flesh profiteth nothing? It profits nothing as the Jews 
'understood i^ — as it is torn in pieces in a dead body — {quomodo in cadavere 
tdlaniatur aut i^i macello venditur,) or sold in the shambles. But it profits as 
quickened by the opirit ; for if the flesh profited nothing the Word would not 
Kave been made flesh that he might dw^ell in us." 

I have quoted St. Augustin's opinion to you ; I could, if time 
permitted, refer you to eighty-seven Fathers, of whom all agree 
in giving the same interpretation to the passages referred to. If 
ev6r there was an era in the Christian church when transubstan- 
tiation was not received and acknowledged as the doctrine of 
the church, there should be some public formulary of prayer — 
some public and well established Liturgy, out of which that 
doctrine was excluded. 1 will prove (for I have the Liturgies 
here,) that this doctrine has been inculcated in all of them from 
the first era of Christianity down to the period of the Reforma- 
tion. I have here also the Liturgy even of Nestorius. After 
he broached his heresy in the east, he framed a Liturgy for his 
followers, in which he professes his belief in the doctrine of 
transubstantiation. Simeon, of Thessalonica, who flourished 
before the council of Florence, and who was in great repute 
among the Greeks, says, 

'' When the priest or deacon has said with a loud voice ra ayia rots ayion 
* huly things are for the holy.' Whei* the bishop, the priests, and the deacons 
have received and when the body and blood are mixed together in the chalice 
for the communicants, the priest or deacon carries the sacred relics of the 
divine bread in the sacred chalice. He ^hows them to all the people ; that 
is, he shows Jesus Christ, and th,^t which is his proper body and his true 
bio4)d, which he has sacrificed for us, iii.i purchased people, which he givci 
us, and permits us to taste, to see, and to feel : where the holy people set 
him with the soul, they adore him end lUtk of him whatever is necessary fof 
tbeir salviUioii." 



r'HE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUES f AN TI ATION. 211 

And a little after he says, 

•* They ought to prostrate themselves on the ground, and to adore with al 
ffieir soul* the living bread, which, with the blood, is in the chalice." 

Mr. Pope — Gentlemen, Mr. Maguire's first and direct prooi 
of transubstantiation is taken from the priesthood of Melchise- 
dech, who, he informs us, offered up bread and wine. The 
Dotiay versio translates the 18th verse of the 14th chaptei of 
Genesis, thus . 

•'* But Melchisedech, king of Salem, bringing forth bread and wine, k h6 
was priest of the Most High God, blessed him, and said" — 

The expression, you perceive, is, " brought forth breao and 
wine," not " offered up bread and wine." Pererius. a Jesuit, 
says, t) at 

" Thee is nothing here concerning oblation, but the bringing forth of bread 
and wi'^ 5j not to God, but to Abraham, as is proved by reference to Augustin 
and Am »rose." , 

The e is a strange alteration in the text of the Douay Bible. 
Jt is s/id, j'or he was the priest of the most High God. Pererius 
infori'^s us that the Hebrew, literally rendered, should be, " and 
he vv/'s," and not " for he was." Melchisedech blessed Abra- 
ham ; the blessing Abraham, and not the bringing forth of bread 
and wine, was characteristic of the priesthood of Melchisedech. 
Cardinal Cajetan states, *' That which is introduced, touching 
t^e priesthood of Melchisedech, is a separate clause." 

Christ, because he lives for ever, has an unchangeable priest* 
hood , and therefore needs not transfer it to others. The woid 
" priest," is a corruption of the French word " petre," which is 
derived from the Greek, " nQf.a^vTSQog^^^ signifying an elder. 
I here challenge Mr. Maguire to produce a single passage in the 
New Testament, where the minister of the gospel is designated 
hegevg 

My friend has brought forward, in support of the doctrine of 
transubstantiation, passages from the gospel of John and from 
the words of our Saviour, in the institution of the Lord's supper. 
I put it to every rational man, whether such a doctrine as transub* 
9ta7itiation, which contradicts reason, and the senses given to us by 
God himself, — the very evidence on rchich the resurrection is cstab* 
iished, — should not be built upon plain^ decided, and unq^uestionalh 
passages / 

I shall quote to you the opinions of a number of Roman Catholic 
ecclesiastics and writers, acknowledging that the scriptures do 
not evidently prove the doctrine of transubstantiation. Bellar- 
mine, (De Each. 1. 3, c. 23,) Suarez, (in 3 di3.49, qu. 75, sec. 2,) 
and Vasquez (in 9 part disp. 180, qu. 76, art. 2, c. 15,) admit, 
that Scotus acknowledges that this doctrine cannot be proved 
cieaily from scripture. Bellarmiae aifows that this opinion is noi 



212 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATIC t 

improbable ; and Suarez and Vasquez confess, that Dutandua 
made a similar statement. — (in Sent. 1. 4, dist. 11, qu 1, n. 16.) 
Ocham, another celebrated schoolman, expressly rem. .rks, that 

" The doctrine which holds that the substance of bread and uine remains 
after consecration, is neither repugnant to reason nor to script •re."— (In 4, 
Sent. a. 5, et auodl. 4, a. 3.) 

Gabriel Bicl, another great divine of the church of R:me, 
"reely declares, that — 

*' As to any thing expressed in the canon of the scriptures, a man maj 
bcHeve that the substance of bread and wine doth remain after Osnist^jratien." 

And therefore he ascribes transubstantiation to some other 
revelation beside scripture, witri which he supposes the church ot 
Rome was favoured. — (in Canon Miss. Lect. 40.) 

Cardinal De Allaco, of Cambray, plainly informs us, that — 

" The doctrine of the substance of bread and wine remaining after consei 
cration is more easy and free from absurdity j more rational^ and no ways repugn 
nani to the authmity of scripture,''^ 

Nay more, that for the other doctrine, viz. of transubstantiation, 

" There is no evidence in scripture,'''' — (In 4, Sen. Ct. 6. Art. 2.) 

Cardinal Cajetan confesses that, 

" The gospel no where expresses that the bread is changed into the bodj 
nf Christ ; that we have this from the authority of the church." 

Nay he goes further, 

" That there is nothing in the gospel which enforceth any man to under- 
Btand these words of Christ, ' this is my body,' in a proper and not in a meta- 
phorical sense ; but the church having understood them in a proper sense, 
they are to be so explained." — (In Aquin. 3, part. Clu. 75, Art 1.) 

I might add several quotations, to show that it is the opinion 
of many other Roman Catholic divines, that the doctrine of tran- 
substantiation is not supported by holy writ. My friend has 
referred us to the 6th of John. He has dwelt on the superi- 
ority of the bread of which Christ speaks, to the manna which 
supported the Israelites in the wilderness ; and contends, that if 
that bread be not literally the body of Christ, it possesses no 
superiority above the manna. I ask, what was it that came down 
from heaven ? "I am the living bread that came down from 
heaven." Was it the body of Christ 1 Was it the sensible, 
corporeal frame ? I put this again to you. No — the body was 
received fronj the Virgin Mary : but Christ in his divine nature 
came from above : Christ in his divine nature is the bread on 
which his people feed, spiritually, not carnally : they are nour- 
ished by the truths in which they believe. In this consists the 
superiority of the bread of life above the manna in the wilderness. 

My friend has asked, would the Saviour have allowed th« 
l^ople of Capernaum to lie under a mistake ? It ill becomda 



THE DOCTRJ..E OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 219 

AS Vo pry into the mysterious proceedings of infinite Wisdom. 
•^ Unto jou," said Christ to his disciples, " it is given to kno\9 
lie mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them that are 
ivithout in parables." I am told not only that the Jews murmured 
it his language, but that some of his disciples departed from him. 
They that were not his real followers, and had not been taught by 
lim, is manifest by the fact that they misunderstood the spiritual 
r^oaning of the Saviour's words, and by their departure from him. 
[f Mr. Maguire adduces this chapter in support of transubstar*- 
tsation, it proves too much. In the same chapter it is said, 
" He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life." 

If such passages prove transubstantiation, then every individual, 
whatever his character may be, who partakes of the outward 
elements, is in possession of everlasting life ! Our Saviour 
turows light upon the import of his language when he says, 

" He that cometh to me, shall never hunger, and he that believeth on Me 
^nall never thirst."— (v. 35.) 

My friend will acknowledge, that believing is a spiritual act ; 
nrid yet the Saviour distinctly says, " He that believeth on me 
snail never thirst." In strict accordance with this view is the 
rivmark of Augustin : 

" Why preparest thou thy teeth and stomach ? Believe, and thou hast eaten 
U "—Tract 25. 

Such is the language of Augustin. Does not the Redeemei 
himself say, 

" The spirit quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing ; the words that I have 
a'joken to you, are spirit and life." — John, vi, 46. 

And when he asked those disciples who remained with him, 
Will ye also go away ?" — -they replied, 

" To whom shall we go ? Thou hast the words of eternal life, and we have 
Delieved and known, that thou art Christ the son of God." 

Christ also, in reference to Judas and the disciples who 
departed from him, says, 

" There are some of you that believe not For Jesus knew from the begin- 
ning who they were that did not believe, and wJio he was that would betray 
him."— 65, v. 

Origen thus speaks : 

" There is also in the New Testament a letter, which kills him who doth 
not spintually understand ihose things wh'ch are said : for if we take accord- 
mg to the letter that which is said, except ye can eat my flesh, and drink my 
blood, this letter kills." — (Homil. Levit. chap. 10.) 

Augustin, in his Treatise de Doctrina Christiana, says : 

" If the speech be a precept forbidding some heinous wickedness or crime. 
ar commandmg us to do gocnl, it is not figurative ; but if it seem to command 
My heinoui wickediess ->r crime, or to forbid that which m profitable oi 



214 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIAlIOPf. 

beneficial to others, it is figurative. For example, * except ye eat the flesh \il 
the Son of Man and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.' This seems lo 
command a heinous wickedness and crime • therefore it is a figure ; command- 
\ng us to communicate of the passion ci ^ ur Lord, ana with df light and 
advantage to lay up in our memory (mark is not the body of Christ in our 
bodies, but ^o lay up in our memories) that his flesh was crucified and wounded 
for us. ' — lab. iii, torn, iii, p. 53, Edit. Basil, 1596.) 

Mr, Magiiire has referred to the Saviour's words at the insli- 
t jtion of the Lord's Supper, " this is my body," I ask, may we 
not interpret the expression figuratively ? Did the Redeen^er 
always speak literally ? Does he not say, ** I am the dooi ," 
(John, X, 9.) "I am the vine?" (John, xv, i.) If the Redeemer 
spoke even once figuratively, he may have spoken figuratively 
on this occasion. There is a figure in the following passage, 
"This is my blood of the New Testament." Here the chalicr 
is the blood of Chnst : the material substance of the cup i'\ 
according to the letter the very blood of Christ. The Savioui 
speaks, we perceive figuratively in the very context. Now, \\ 
one part of the Saviour's words at the institution of the Eucha- 
rist is to be taken literally, why not the rest 1 But are we to 
suppose that the cup is transubstantiated into the blood of Christ ? 
I would also ask Mr. Maguire, is there not another specimen o| 
figurative language in the expression, ** this is my blood which 
is shed ]" Was the Saviour's blood shed when he said, " it is 
shed ?" Was his body broken, when he said, " it is broken ?" 
My friend has threatened us with a great number of quotations 
from the Fathers ; permit me to call your attention to a few 
Tertullian says — 

** God,m your gospel, has so revealed the matter, calling the bread his own 
body, that you may hence understand how he gave bre?^ to be the figure 
of his own body ; which body, conversely, the prophcil has figurativelt 
called bread, the Lord himself being afterwards about (c Titerpret this sacra- 
ment."— Adv. Marcion. Lib. iii, § 12, 13, p. 209 

Arguing against the sceptics, who denied the certainty of sense, 
he says — 

" We must not call our senses in questiony lest we should doubt respecting 
their fidelity even in the case of Christ himself Because, if we question the 
idelity of our senses, we might peradventure be led to say, that Christ delu* 
sively beheld Satan precipitated from heaven, or delusively heard the voice of 
his Father, testifying of him, or was deceived when he touched Peter's mother- 
in-law, or smelt a different odour of the ointment which he received for hifl 
sepulture, or tasted a different flavour of the wine which he consecrated in 
memory of his blood." — De Anim. in cap, de quinque sens, open p. 653. 

Cyril of Jerusalem says, 

" With all assurance, let us partaKe as of the body and blood of Christ : 
tor under the type of bread, His body is given to tbee, and under the type of 
wine his blood is given to thee ; that sr thou mayst partake of the body and 
blood of Christ, being one body and one olood with him." — Catech. Mysta^ 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 21^ 

Chrysostom says, 

" Cnder the name of flesh scripture is wont alike to set foiih themyateriei 
Wid the whole church : for it says, that they are each the body of Christ." — 
Comment in Epist ad. Galat. c. v, oper. vol. ix, p. 1022. Commel. 1603. 

Again, 

" Wherefore let there approach no Judas partaking of the poison of iniquity j 
for the Eucharist is spiritual tbod." — De Prodit. Jud. Serm. 30, oj>or. vol v, 
p. 464. 

Augustin says — 

'* The Lord, when Ir ' gave the sign of his body, did not doubt to say, thj^ 
is my body."— Contr. A i^man. c 12, oper. vol. vi, p. 69, Colon. 1616. 

Again — 

" In the history of the New Testament, so great and so marvelous was the 
patience of our Lord, that bearing with Judas, though not ignorant of hia 
purpose, he admitted him to the banquet, in which he commended and deliv- 
erea to his disciples the figure of his own body and blood." — Enarr. in Ps» 
iii, oper. vol. viii, p. 7. 

Again, 

" Christ instructed his disciples, and said unto them — * it is the spirit that 
quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing : the words which I speak unto you, 
are spirit and life :' as if he had said, understand spiritually what I have 
spoken : you are not about to eat this identical body which you see, and you 
are not about to drink this identical blood, which they who crucify me, will 
pour out : on the contrary, I have commended a certain sacrament unto yo>i, 
which will vivify you if spiritually understood, though it must be cele- 
brated visibly, yet it must be understood invisibly." — Enarr. in Ps. xcvii . 
oper. vol. viii, p. 397. 

Pope Gelasius is of the same opinion. — De Duab. Nat. Christ 
Cont. Nestor, et Eutych. in Biblioth. Patr. vol. 4, p. 422. 

I now meet my friend's challenge as to ancient hturgies, Li 
different liturgies, even after the words of consecration^ and aft6 r 
some prayers, the priest beseeches God to make this bread the holy 
body of Christ, and this cup the precious blood of Christ, These 
are the words used in the formulary called the liturgy of James, 
and the like prayer after the words of consecration occurs in the 
liturgies of Mark, John, Chrysostom and Basil. Is it not an 
article of faith in the curch of Rome, that when the words of 
consecration are one 3 pronounced, no bread or wine remains, 
but the real body and blood of Christ ; and is not the Host 
imrjfiediately elevated and adored ? If the authors of these 
liturgies held the same doctrine, is it not absurd, that they should 
offer a prayer to God, to do that which they believed had boeK 
already done ; to make the bread and wine the body and blood 
of Christ, a thing which they beheved had been already done, li 
they were of the same opinion with the church of Rome ? 

The authors of the Mass did not themselves believe in tran 
substantiation ; they often call the Eucharist an imager b. pledge. 
(ex Miss. Sar. et Ro ) Why should they call it an image « 



f J6 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBST iNTIATION. 

pledge, if they believed it to be the thing itself? The Sarum 
Missal (Fer Quat. Temp.) confesses that, 

" God wovdd have his sacraments consist of the fruits of the earth :" thejf 
plainly acknowledge of the sacrament, *' Cibavit eos ex adipe frumenti," he 
fed them with the flower of wk^at ; wherefore by their own acknowledgment, 
the sacrament which is eaten, is the fruit of the earth, and the flower of wheat 
(Ex horis de 5, Sacr. impr. per Sac Keruer, Paris, Ann. 1570, et in Ro. Miss 
in solen. Sacratis. Corpor. Ghri. in princip.) 

In the Post-communion, after every bishop-confessor, the 
Ronjan Missal, and the Missal of Sarum, in the Post-commu- 
nion prayer (Feria Sixta) say, 

" We beseech thee^ Lord, that giving thanks unto thee for these gifts which 
tee have received, we may receive better gifts,'*'' 

But if Christ be substantially present, what better gift could 
they desire than the Saviour himself ! In another place they 
pray, 

" That which we have received with ournwutlis, O Lord, grant that with pure 
minds we may also take, that of a temporal gift U may be made an eternal remedy,^^ 
(In can. Miss, et Ra Br. Fer. 5, post po. passionis.) 

Christ's body is not a temporal, but an everlastmg gift and 
remedy. Again, 

*■ That which we have received in the image of the sacrament, grant we may 
receive by manifest participation,^^ 

After the same manner they pray again, 

** Let thy holy sacraments perfect, Lord, that which they contain, that whUi 
K»€ do now in show, we may receive in the certain truth of things themselves^ 
(in Fest, S. Swythen. in Post-compignus vitae aeternae in miss. Sar. 

They confess that they do it in show. I ask, if the body and 
'ilood of Christ were actually present, would they have used this 
1 xpression ? 

Again, in the Post-communion of the Mass of the Virgin 
Mary, they call the sacraments the helps of our salvation^ salutis 
nostrae subsidia ; but if they were the body and blood of Christ, 
it would be blasphemy to call him the help of salvation, who is 
salvation itself. — (Miss, Sar. in Post. Com. in Miss. Bea. Virg. 
Mar.) In the secret of the office of the dead, they say, receive 
O Lardy for the soul of thy servant^ the Host which thou didsi 
offer to God the Father for us bountifully. — (Miss. Sar. in offic. 
mort.) If the Host be the very body of Christ, then to offer 
Christ to himself would be most absurd. In the canon they 
oray, that God xcould accept the things offered^ as he accepted the 
sacrifice of his holy child MeU the sacrifice of Abraham^ and thai 
which JMelchisedech offered, I ask, would it not be blasphemy to 
compare the sacrifices of Abel, Abraham and Milchisedechi 
however holy, with the body and blood of Christ t 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 117 

Mr. Maguire. — If my friend, Mr. Pope, would be in any 
manner consistent with himself, this controversy would have a 
speedy termination. Iv is no difficult matter for puny man 
limited as he is in understanding, to raise objections against holy 
mysteries. The very i^ame objections which Mr. Pope haa 
urged against the doctrine of transubstantiation, the Socinian 
may urge against the Tru^ity — as being a mystery incompre- 
hensible to human reason. Hear the words spoken here on the 
second day of the discussion by Mr. Pope, in regard to the doc- 
trine of the Trinity, as given in the JMorning Register : 

"1 remember that reason has its legitimate province. If God has reviialed 
the fact that three persons are one in the Divine essence, but not how that 
essence is formed, I believe the statement, I am not called npon to believe 
how it is effected. It is not for us to bring before the bar of natural reason 
the groat Being who makes the statement. If we are convinced that this is the 
book of God, we must be convinced that the three divine persons are in one. 
It is above ivi*oon, but not opposed to reason, and we are bound to receive it." 

I shall answer Mr. Pope's objections by his own arguments. 
Confining myself to the language of Mr. Pope, I affirm, that if 
It be revealed ni scripture, that the sacred body and blood of 
Clirist are bequeathed to us as a legacy, it is not for us to bring 
the God of heaven before the bar of natural reason. If we are 
convinced thai me statement has been made, we must be con 
vinced of the iaci. It may be above reason, but it is not con 
trary to reason. In common consistency, therefore, he is bound 
to receive the docirme. 

Mr. Pope has recurred to Melchisedech ; I did not bring 
forward Melchisedech as a direct proof, though perhaps it is 
^tantamount to a direct one. The onus lies on Mr. Pope lO 
*how where or when Melchisedech did offer a sacrifice, if pot 
« the instance to which reference has been made. Melchise- 
dech is called a priest of the Most High. If in this instance 
Mr. Pope will have it that Melchisedech merely gav e bread and 
whie to Abraham, I call upon him to show where, in any other 
mstance, Melchisedech is recorded to have ofiered sacrifice to 
the Lord ; and if he cannot, why is Melchisedech called a priest 
of the Most High? 

I prefer to Mr. Pope's version of the scriptures that of .^u 
Jerome, who spent fourteen years in Palestine, and the com- 
mentaries of Dr. Wall, which are in my possession, Mr. Pope 
quotes Catholic authorities to show that there is not evident 
proof derivable from scripture, for the doctrine of transubstan- 
tiation. There is not mathematical evidence, such as 2 and 2 
make 4 ; for what is evident cannot be contested. But th« 
proof approaches very nearly to an evident one, when our Savjoul 
emphatically says, ^' this is my body,'* "this is my blood 
That surely is a very close approximation to evideac 



218 THE DOCTKiiVE OF TRANS UBSTANTIATION. 

Mr. Pope has not been able to produce any Catholic (Hvinea 
who contradicted the doctrine of transubstantiation. I am ready 
to admit, that there is no self-evident proof for the doctrine of 
transubstantiation ; but Christ has pronounced the words " this 
is my body — this is my blood," and I therefore beheve. 

Let Mr. Pope produce any passage equally clear upon the 
doctrines of the Trinity — the Incarnation, o' any other doctrine 
of Christianity. Mr. Pope says, that Christ came down, not in 
his body, from heaven. I assert that he did come, as to his 
humanity, from heaven, when Mary was overshadowed by the 
Holy Ghost ; the Saviour's body came direct from the power 
and finger of God, and was formed of the substance of a pure 
immaculate virgin. 

My Reverend opponent says, that the Redeemer was in the 
habit of speaking in parables. Whenever Christ made a reve- 
lation of an article of faith, did he speak in parables ? When- 
ever such a revelation is made, I do not believe our Saviour 
propounds it parabolically. W^hen some of the disciples of 
Jesus became shocked at his expressions at Capernaum, and 
when he saw the Jews alarmed and debating with themselves, 
and he himself becoming uneasy about this fact, as is evidenced 
by his subsequent question to the Apostles, " Will you also leave 
mel" It would be most strange that, if he had been only speak- 
ing metaphorically, he should have, as it were, confirmed them 
in their error, by adding this strong expression — 

"Amen, I say unto you, unless you eat the fl'«?sh of the Son of man, and 
drink his blood, you shall not have life in you." 

It is a melancholy instance of human infirmity to find such 
objections raised against that which has been so obviously and 
evidently revealed. It is the doctrine of the council of Trent, 
that he who receives the body and blood of Christ unworthily, 
eats and drinks perdition to himself, not discerning the body 
of the Lord. 

Therefore, when the doctors of the church speak of spiritual 
things, they mean that the sacrament may be really received by 
a man without its accompanying spiritual graces. No man will 
deny, that baptism is a representation of Christ's death and re- 
surrection, by regenerating man from a spiritual death to a spir- 
itual life — and yet it is acknowledged to be a real sicramenti 
and to coafer real grace. Mr. Pope may deny the fact if he 
choose, but I have all the Protestants of the church of England 
with me on the subject. Christ's body and blood are a reality, 
and a figure at one and the same time — they are not given in 
their natural and gross manner, but as the fulfilment of the type 
in the old law. The Pascal Lamb was the figure of Christ'* 
body and blood, and if the body and blood be not pre^^ent, tber« 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 215 

is n3 fulfilment of the type in the new law. If the sacramenl 
be mere bread and wine, it is impossible to conceive how a man 
who receives unworthily can eat and drink damnation to himself 
Our Saviour says " I am the door ; I am the vine ; I am the 
good shepherd." Mr. Pope concludes, that because he speak? 
figuratively in one instance, he does so in all. When our Re- 
deemer said, he was the door and the vine, was there a man ol 
common sense listening to him, who did not know that he spoke 
metaphorically ? The expressions were not violent or unnat- 
ural, they were in accordance with the general tenor of the 
language of the day. But if he had taken a vine in his hand, 
and said, " I am this vine" — or, if he took up a door and said, 
" I am this door" — or, if taking hold of a shepherd he said, *' I 
am this shepherd ; then would the metaphor appear extravagant 
and absurd. But when he tooli the bread, and blessing it said, 
" THIS IS MY body" — there evidently was no metaphor intended. 
Had he said, " this bread is my body," such an expression 
would be truly metaphorical, but " this is my body," clearly 
supposes a change of substance. 

When, at the marriage of Cana of Gallilee,our Saviour changed 
water into wine there was a real transubstantiation. If he had 
then said, " this water is wine," it would be a metaphor ; but if 
he said, " this is wine," there was no metaphor, as a real tran- 
substantiation had taken place, and there was no water there. 
When Moses changed his rod into a serpent, if he said, *' this la 
a serpent," that would not be a metaphor ; but had he said, 
"this rod is a serpent," there he would speak metaphorically 
When Christ therefore said, " this is my body," it is plain and 
evident that he did not speak metaphorically. If a person asked 
for some good wine, and that in reply another said to him, "take 
this bottle," the metaphor is natural and obvious ; but if he said, 
handing him a bottle of milk, "this bottle is wine," the metaphor 
would then indeed be foolish, extravagant and unintelligible. 
Mr. Pope has quoted the words, " this is my blood which is 
shed for many for the remission of sins." This is one of the 
strongest proofs in support of the doctrine of transubstantiation. 
If the expression was, " shall be shed," it Plight seem to n)ilitate 
against that doctrine. But the expression " is shed," proves that 
Christ offered himself to bis Father before he had actually suf- 
fered, and applied the graces annexed to the sacrament before 
he had actually suffered on the cross. The graces which were 
to flow from that offering he here applied in the sacrament, foi 
if not, there was no sacrament instituted. Now. if he applied 
the graces before his death in the sacrament, I am at a loss to 
know why the action, havmg taken place previously to hi^ de»ti^ 
should form any bai to the doctrine of transubstantiation. 



220 THE DOCTRINE OF TRAN^UBSTANTIATION* 

St. Cyril of Jerusalem has been quoted by my friend. )^.uu 
Bhall hear him again, and you can then decide whether it be not 
extremely foolish to introduce that holy Father as opposed to 
transubstantiation. After quoting the words of St. Paul, "1 
have received of the Lord that which I also have dehvered unto 
you," he proceeds to say : 

" This doctrine of the blessed Paul may be sufficient to satisfy you con- 
cerning the divine mysteries which you have received, that you have been 
made partakers of the body and blood of Christ. The bread and wine, which 
before the invocation of the adorable Trinity were nothing but bread and 
wine, became after this invocation the body and blood of Christ. The Euchar- 
istic bread, after the invocation of the Holy Spirit, is no longer common bread, 
but the body of Christ. — Wherefore, I conjure, my brethren, not to consider 
them any more as common bread and wme, since they are the body and 
blood of Jesus Christ, according to his own words ; and although your sensei 
might suggest that to you, let faith confirm you. Judge not of the thing by 
vour taste, but by faith assure yourself, without the least doubt, that you are 
nonoured with the body and blood of Jesus Christ. That which appears 
bread is not bread, though the taste judge otherwise — ths wine which you see, 
and which tastes like ivine, is not wine, but the blood of Christ." 

Here St. Cyril impresses on us to believe the real presence 
of Christ in the sacrament, though the doctrine may appear con- 
trary to some of our senses. Every thing which St. Cyril here 
says, makes for the doctrine which I now advocate ; and Mr. 
Pope will perform a greater miracle than tiansubstantiation 
itself, if he shall demonstrate that St. Cyril was opposed to that 
doctrine. I wonder why all those Fathers should take such ex- 
traordinary pains to impress upon the minds of their hearers the 
absolute necessity of believing contrary to their seeing, touching, 
and tasting, if there were nothing in that sacrament but the ele- 
«nent of bread and wine. 

My friend has quoted St. Augustin likewise. From what 
• have quoted already, touching the sacraments, from this great 
1 ather of the church, you can easily perceive that he speaks most 
plainly of transubstantiation. On the 33d Psalm we find, that 
be even calls this mystery the sacrifice of the body and blood of 
our Lord. I shall give you his original words . 

"Erat autem, ut nostis sacrificium Judaeorum in victimus peccorum secun- 
dum ordinum Aaron, et hoc in mysterio; nondum erat sacrificium Corporis 
6t eanguinis domini quod norunt fideles et qui evangelium legerunt, quod 
iacriticium nunc difFusum est in toto orb6 terrarum." 

"There was ye are aware, first, the sacrifice of the Jews, which consist c« 
in victims of cattle, according to the order of Aaron ; and this in a mysterj. 
The sacrifice of the body and blood of our Lord was not yet instituted, which 
the faithful know, and those who read the gospel, which sacrifice ig now es- 
tablished throughout the whole world." 

If there be nothing in the sacrament of the Eucharist but n.^rii 
elements of bread and wine, it could not, nor ought it to be called 
a sacrifice. But St. Augustin styles it the sacrifice of the body 
tud blood of our Lord. It is manifest then that he held a totd 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTI ATION. 22l 

change of the elements into the body and blood of Christ 
When therefore he speaks of the sacrament as something spir- 
itual, he only draws a distinction between the body and blood 
of Christ in a carnal or gross sense, and between the body and 
blood of Christ in a true, substantial, but sacramental sense. 
The first was the error of those at Capernaum, as St. x-Vugustin 
himself describes it. " Quomodo in cadevere dilaniatur, lut m 
macello venditur." The second is the true and orthodox sense.j 
as the same Father exp'ains it. " Quomodo spiritu vegetatui.^' 
This, I think, most satisfactorily reconciles St. Augustin's ap- 
parent discrepancy. I here request that you will reflect upon 
the passage of St. Augustin, where he describes one of his 
priests ofl^ering up the sacrifice of the mass for the servants and 
cattle of Tribune. 

I could quote several other passages from St. Augustin, if 
his authority were called in question, on that subject. I have 
sixty or seventy Fathers, (Ignatus, Justin Martyr, Irenceus, 
TertuUian, Origen, Hyppolitus, and Cyprian, &c, &c, &c,) 
whom T could also quote if time permitted. The extracts are 
here on the table. I take not their words mutatis mutandis^ but 
I am ready to read whole passages from them, where they treat 
Oi: this subject professedly. St. Augustin, you will remember, 
in his Commentary on the words of the 33d Psalm, " ferebatur 
in manibus suis," says that our Lord carried his body in his own 
hand, at his last supper. After such passages, it is idle and 
foolish in the extreme to quote St. Augustin as opposed to the 
doctrine of transubstantiation. 

I shall now proceed to notice the othe^ objections advanced 
by Mr. Pope. The book of Gelasius is doubted by maiy 
critics, and it is uncertain whether it was written by Pope Gel- 
sius, or by Gelasius Cyzinicus. But even supposing it to hav? 
been written by Pope Gelasius, I am here ready to show that ii 
proves nothing against the doctrine of transubstantiation, as 
Hawarden has plainly demonstrated. Mr. Pope has quoted the 
ancient Liturgies to show that prayers were offered to God tc 
change the elements after the words of consecration had been 
pronounced. Dr. Brett, a Protestant, and who was by no meajis 
favourably irclined to Popery, translated all the cine lent Litur- 
gies from the original Greek. I am ready to prove from e\ery 
one of them, that the sacrifice of the Mass and transub:stantia- 
tion were derived from the Apostles, and believed throughout tht 
church, both eastern and western. In the Liturgy of St. James, 
which has been quoted by Mr. Pope, after the words : 

" 1 his is my body which is broken and given for you, for the remission o! 
tins." "This is my blood of the New Testament, M'hich is shed and giiei 
for you and for many^ for the remission of sins." 

19* 



2iZ THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

And, after some prayers, he thus addresses himself to M 
mi|^hty God, 

"S(ind down, O Lord, this thy most holy spirit upon us, and upon these 
holy gifts here set before thee : that by his h^iy, good, and glorious presence 
he may sanctify and make this bread the body of thy Christ, and this cup the 
precious blood of thy Christ." 

It was here objected that the Greeks did not believe in trarj. 
substantiation, because after the words of consecration they 
prayed : " Make this bread the holy body of thy Christ, and this 
cup the precious blood of thy Christ." But this objection was 
fully answered by the Greeks themselves in the council of 
Florence, who by the mouth of Isidorus, metropolitan of Syria, 
and legate of the patriarch of Antioch, and one of the seven 
deputed by the Greek prelates to dispute with the Latins, replied 
that the Greeks did unanimously believe the consecration to be 
ralid, and the change to be effected by the words of Christ : — 
" This is my body — this is my blood ;" and that they differed 
from the Latin church, merely as to the manner of explaining 
themselves. But that having found the above prayer in the 
missals of Saints Basil and Chrysostom, which they then used, 
and which were extant without any alteration, long before the 
time of their separation from the Latin churoh, they did not think 
fit to discard it. I shall give you the words of Isidorus himself 
as they were taken down by the interpreter of the said council : — 

"Hoc Missale quo utimur est traditum a Basilio et beato Chrysostomo: 
utebarnur autem eo aute tempus schismatis, nee aliqua facta est mutatio : 
tamen occidentalis Ecclesia nunquam Sre hoc verbum fecit, videlicet cum 
fuerimus Concordes, et ad eundem finem tendentes ; secundum rem dicimua 
idem, etcredimus id quod conficit mysterium esse sermonem Domini, et Domi- 
nicam vocem esse effectricem divinorum munerum, et il la vox semper explicatur 
a sacerdote, et suscipit sacerdes quod vox replicata aptetur, et sit eadem vox 
cum voce Domini ; et ut ita aptetur, invocatur spiritus sanctus et supplicat 
sacerdos, ut per virtutem spiritus sancti concedatur gratia ut vox repetita 
efficiatur ita effectiva, ut verbum Dei fuit ; et ita credimus consummativa 
fieri per illam orationem sacerdotis. Dominicse voces habent operationem ut 
semina, quia sine semine non potest effici fructus; ita in hoc dominica voce: 
tamen ubi cadet semen, eget aliis instrumentis ut sacerdotis, altaris, oratio- 
num, unde credimus per hoc vobiscum esse Concordes." 

"This Missal which we use was deHvered to us by St. Basil and St. Chry- 
sostom, and it is the same we used before the time of the schism ; nor is there 
uny change made in it ; yet the Latin church never made any exception on 
thi*& head, inasmuch, as we were of one accord, and tending to the same end. 
We in reality say the same thing, and believe that that which completes the 
mystery is the word of the Lord, and that the word of our Lord produces the 
divine gifts, and that the word is always expressed by the priest, and the 
priest takes care that the word repeated should be adapted to, and b( the 
same with the word oi our Lord ; and that it may be so adapted, the Holy 
Ghost is invoked, and the priest prays that by virtue of the Holy Ghost 
grace may be granted, that the repeated word may be made as effective aj 
tlie word of God was. And so we believe that it becomes consummated bt 
th«t prayer of the priest The words of our Lord are operative like seei 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTI ATION. 228 

for as fruit cannot be produced without seed, so it is in this word of our Lord. 
jel where this seed falls it requires other instruments, for example a priest, 
an altar, and prayers, whence we beheve that in this matter v\e substantiaH} 
accord with you." 

Mr. Pope. — Mr. Maguire, in maintaining the doctrine oi 
(ransubstantiation, observed, that it is such a mystery, that iv6 
are not to pry into it, and endeavoured to institute a comparisor 
between it and the doctrine of the Trinity. I deny altogether 
that any parallelism exists. On the doctrine of the Trinity we 
are incapable of exercising our senses. Man, by the mere 
exercise of sense, cannot find out the Almighty. An infinite 
distance exists between the Divine nature and my faculties. 
But my senses, in their legitimate province, are a divine reve- 
lation, and the direct inlets of knowledge to the mind. Though 
they cannot investigate the nature of God, for it is above their 
reach, I can bring one and all of them to bear upon transubstan- 
tiation ; and their united testimony is, that the bread is bread, 
and the wine is wine. Hence no parallel can be drawn between 
t^-ansubstantiation and the doctrine of the Trinity. 

My friend has said, that the onus rests on me to show, that 
Melchisedech made an offering, in order to demonstrate the 
priesthood. I answer, that it is quite sufficient for me, that God 
has called him a priest. I have already referred to Roman 
Catholic authority to show, that the word translated '' brought 
FORTH," is properly rendered, the original expression having no 
reference to oblation ; that the w^ord rendered "/<9/-," in the 
Douay Bible, does not signify "/or," but " and^^^ and that the 
latter part of the eighteenth verse is a separate clause. 

Mr. Maguire has told us, that two and two make four. Does 
he mean to introduce this arithmetical calculation to illustrate 
the proposition, that that which has all the properties of bread is 
flesh? S^ich a position I maintain, is absurd, opposed to the 
common lense of mankind, to the testimony of our senses, and 
contradictory to the doctrines of holy writ. 

My friend has said, that the body of Christ came down from 
above in consequence of his preternatural generation, through 
the power of the Holy Ghost. I would refer him to the language 
of the Athanasian creed, which Mr. Maguire has subscrihed. 
That formulary, speaking of the Saviour says, "God of the 
substance of the Father, begotten before the world, and man of 
tU substance of his mother, born in the world." So much foi 
Mr. Maouire's theological accuracy. 

My friend has said, that the council of Trent holds, that 
although man may partake of the body and blood, soul and 
divinity of Christ, yet, if he possesses not the grace of God, he 
■hall perish. I v\ould ask a simple question. Why should tlu 



224 THE DOCTRINE OP TR/VNSUBSTANTIA TION. 

council of Trent take one part of our Saviour's words literacy 
and in other passages, where the scripture militates against th< 
views of the church of Rome, reject the literal sense? 

Mr. Maguire has said, if the Saviour took the door in hsa 
hands and said, "I am this door;" or if he took the vine in h}s 
hand, and said, " I am this vine," the case would have been 
different — but methinks transubstantiation is still more absurd ; 
for he supposes Christ to intimate, " Here am I, sitting with you 
at the table, circumscribed as to mv humanity, and this bit of 
bread which I hold in my hand is my body ; I grasp this body 
within the palm of my hand, and I give this body from myself 
to you. I give myself from myself, to be partaken of before my 
eyes,^^ My friend has referred us to the marriage-feast. I am 
glad that he has reminded us of a sensible transubstantiation. I 
imagine that the guests saw that the water was changed into 
wine, and from their taste also, were conscious of the change. 
My friend perceives, that they had only to exercise their senses 
to discover, that that which had been water, with all the proper- 
ties of water, was now wine, with all the properties of wine. 

If Mr. Maguire allowed his flock to exercise their senses 
they too would find, that after consecration the bread is still 
bread, and the wine still wine. Mr. Maguire has made an 
extraordinary statement, that Christ offered himself up, before 
he offered himself up ! He should be loath to throw out insin- 
uations against the correctness of my quofcitions — I have already 
exposed him. Was he not detected yesterday in a quotation 
from a work, to the original of which I referred you ? He says, 
that he quotes from originals — I will not charge my friend with 
an intention wilfully to mislead us, — he was, I will admit, him- 
self deceived, having implicitly confided in the quotations placed 
in his hands; but I say, Mr. Maguire should be cautious. 1 have 
several other quotations. St. Augustin says upon the words : 

"' Me ye have not always.' He speaks of the presence of his body ; ye 
fihall have me according to my providence, according to majesty and invisible 
grace; but according to the flesh which ths Word assumed, according to 
that which was born of the Virgin Mary, ye shall not have me ; therefore, 
because that he conversed with his disciples forty days, he is ascended up 
into heaven and is not here." — Tract 50 in Jean. Edit. Basil. 1596. 

Yet the church of Rome says, that the body of Christ is od 
every altar ! In the 23d epistle — 

*'If the sacraments (says he) had not some resemblance of these things 
whereof they are sacraments, they would not be sacraments at all ; but from 
fchis resemblance they take for the most part the names of the things which 
they represent ; therefore, as the sacrament of the body of Christ is in som« 
maimer or sense Christ's body, and the sacrament of his blood, is the bloo^ 
of Christ, so the sacrament oftaith (meaning baptism) is faith." — ^23d Ejmh* 
Tom. ii, p. 93. 



THE \ 3CTRINE OF TR ANSUBSTANTI ATION. 

I J this passage St. Augustin shows the meaning of the worda 
p.ni[>loyed to designate the Eucharist, and explains many of the 
strong expressions to be found in Mr. Maguire's quotations, 

St. Clement of Alexandria, who lived in the second century 
gays, 

"Inasmuch as Christ declared, that the bread which I give you is my f.esh, 
and inasmuch as flesh is irrigated by blood, therefore the wine is alleg )ri- 
CALLY CALLED blood. — Pseda^'. Lib. i, c. 6, p. 104. For the word is aile- 
GORiCALLT DESIGNATED by many different names, such as meat and fieshj 
and nourishment, and bread, and blood, and milk ; for the Lord is all thing! 
frtr the enjoyment of us who have believed in him. Nor let any one think we 
speak strangely, when we say that milk is allegorically called the bk od 
of the Lord, for is not wine likewise allegorically called by the ' iry 
same appellation ?" — Paedag. lib. i, c. 6, p. 105. 

Again, 

'* The scripture, then, has named wme a mystic symbol of th#/holy blood." 
—Ibid. lib. ii, c. 2, p. 156. 

Again, 

" Be well assured, that Christ also himself partook of wine, masmuch a 
he also was a man. He moreover blessed the Wine, saying, take, drink 
this is my hlood, the blood of the vine. The consecrated liquor of exhilara 
tion, therefore, allegorically REi*RESENts the Word, who poured himseh 
out on behalf of niany for the remission of sins." — Ibid. hb. ii, c. 2, p. 158. 

I have various other quotations to the satne effect, but my 
time is too precious to be expended in reading them ; you can 
judge whether they are not stronger than those which my friend 
has cited. I am convmced that the quotations which I have 
read, are correctly given. My opponent has doubted that pas- 
sage of Pope Gel-asius : 

" Certainly the sacraments of the body and blood of the Lord which ars 
received, are a divine thing, because by these we are made partakers of th«; 
divine nature ; nevertheless the substance or nature of the bread and wine 
ceases not to exist, and assuredly the image and similitude of the body and 
blood of Christ are celebrated in the action of the mysteries." — De duab, 
Christi Katur. Cont. J^Test. et Eutych. in Biblioth, Patr. vol. iv, p. 422. 

My friend tells me that this book is doubted; but there is 
stronger reason why my passages should be genuine than his* 
Protestants have no index expufgatorius to which the Fathers 
must be subject—** Solius est Dei adorari" is purged by that 
index from the index of the works of Athanasius atld Augtlstitl^* 
and if a doctrine of that nature could be purged, is there any 
reason to doubt that the passages which remain untouched., are 
the genuine sentiments of their originals. — Adorari solius Dei 
est : (adoration belongs to God alone) deleatur ex. ind. oper. 
Athdnasii Indice lib. Prohib. et Expiirg. p. 52. Madrit. An, 
1627. Item ex In. Oper. St. August, ibid. p. 56. 

Mr. Maguire has produced passages from Luther. I ask hina 
m the face of the world to produce the places from which the) 



226 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION, 

are taken. They carry upon the face of them their own refuta 
tion. I am satisfied that many of them were never uttered bj 
that eminent and intrepid reformer, the great and mighty Luther. 
As to the liturgies to which I referred^ in order io meet my oppo* 
nent on his oivn ground, they have little weight with me ; but 
they show the opinions of the individuals who used them, upon 
the subject. The Greeks gave, I imagine, but a lame and 
confused account of them at the council of Florence, and these 
liturgies were composed one thousand years before that council. 
If transubstantiation, which, the church of Rome says, takes 
place as soon as the words of consecration are uttered, was held 
by those who used these liturgies, it would be inconsistent, that 
the prayer should be subsequent to the words of consecration, 
and that even after consecration they should continue to call the 
elements gifts. I admit, that the expression is strong, (but 
remember, that it was used after consecration) namely, that God 
would make this bread, the holy body of Christ. We have 
learned from Augustin, that the names of the things signified 
are often employed instead of the names of the signs. My 
friend has not met me respecting the authors of the mass not 
believing in transubstantiation. I am convinced that he cannot 
controvert my proofs, that they did not believe in that doctrine. 
To proceed with my arguments — I have shown that the Saviour, 
even in the very place which describes the institution of the 
sacrament, as well as elsewhere, employed figurative language. 
What reason have we for thinking that there is not figurative 
language in this passage also? I shall assign to you my reasons 
for believing that the expression, " this my body," is to be taken 
in a figurative sense also. Our Saviour says, " do this for a 
commemoration of me." — (Luke, xxii, 19.) I ask, if the real 
body and blood of Christ — if Christ himself, be substantially 
present, how the Eucharist can be observed as a commemorative 
act? The commemoration of a person betokens that the per- 
son commemorated is absent, not present. " As often as ye eat 
this bread, and drink the chalice, ye shall show the death of the 
Lord till he come." — (1 Cor. xi, 25.) There are innumerable 
figurative expressions in holy writ. *' The seven full ears are 
seven years of plenty, the seven lean kine are seven years of 
famine." — (Gen. xli, 26, 27.) " The seven candlesticks are the 
seven churches." — (Apoc. i, 20.) " The seven heads are seven 
mountains." — (Apoc. xvii, 9.) In the passover itself, we have 
the expression, "it is the Lord's passover," (Exod. xii, IL) or 
as the Douay version renders it, " it is the phase of the Lord." 
The auxiliary verb, in the sense of" represent," is usual to the 
sacred writers. Recollect too, that the words, "this is my 
body," were addressed to Jews, who were accustomed to thii 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTI ATION. 227 

0ty\e of language at the feast of the passover. Justhi Marty? 
ceils us, that the form of words, used at the passover from Ezia'a 
fime, was, " this passover is our Saviour and our refuge," — 
vDial. cum TrypL p. 297. Ed. Paris, 1639.)— that is, this 
passover represents him, who is our Saviour and our refuge 
Sear in mind, therefore, that cur Saviour addressed himself t6 
men xohc were prepared to understand him in a figurative sense. 
Further — the Jews were forbidden to eat blood ; (Lev. xvii, 10 
11, 12.) would not the feehngs of the Apostles have been 
shocked, if they believed that the Saviour had commanded them 
to partake of it. The prohibition was not subsequently repealed; 
for, as my friend has observed, the council of Jerusalem, as he 
terms it, enforced an abstinence from blood. Again, if the 
Saviour's words are to be taken literally, they would do away 
with the nature of a sacrament, and contradict the prophec} 
which says, " Thou wilt not suffer thy Holy One to see corrup- 
tion." — Psalm XV, 10. 

Sacred Writ says, that the body of Christ shall not see corrup- 
tion : but the elements, even after consecration, are corruptible ; 
therefore, we argue, that they cannot have been transubstantiated 
into that body, which does not see corruption. Mark the con- 
sequence of rejecting the testimony of sense : that which proves 
the truth of Christ's resurrection, proves the falsehood of tran- 
substantiation ; but if the testimony of sense is to be refused, 
then we weaken the evidence for the Christian revelation. St. 
John, in his first epistle, first chap, says, 

*' That which we have heard^ which we have seen with our eyes, which we 
have looked upon, and which our hands have handled^ of the word of Life: 
for the life was manifested : and we have seen and do bear witness, ana 
declare unto you the hfe eternal, which was with the Father, and hath appeared 
to us: that v/hich we have seen and have heard, we declare unto you, that 
you also niay have fellowship with us, and our fellowship may be v/ith the 
Father and with his Son Jesus Christ." 

When Thomas doubted, the Saviour said to him, 

"Put in thy finger hither, and see my hands, and bring hither thy hano^ 
and put it into my side ; and be not faithless but believing." — John, xx, ^7. 

The Saviour, 'tis true, added, " Blessed are they that have 
not seen, and yet have believed." But he did not say, " Blessed 
are those who have seen^ and yet have not believed ;" the blessing 
was not to those, who having the opportunity of seeing, disre- 
garded the testimony of their senses, but to those who not seeing, 
yet believed — who, when the evidence of sense was wanting, 
yet beheved. I would ask, what is the use of this irrational and 
extraordinary doctrine] I will tell you — to make demi-gods of 
the Roman Catholic priests — to raise them in the estimation of 
che people, and to cause the niultitade to look up to them as met 



228 THE DOCTRINE OF TR ANSUBSTANTIATION. 

who enA create their God. In the dark ages, an accc jnt o\ 
which I read to you, when the priests domineered over th« 
intellects of men, when abust s and fictions were introduced, was 
this monstrous doctrine established. You have heard the story 
of the mule — the heretic was convinced — he exercised his senses 
on the miracle. Now, if he exercised his senses on the miracle 
why should he not have exercised them on transubstantiatio! 
itself? Permit me also to add, that the Saviour most probably 
»4>oke in the Syriac language — and, as in that tongue there is 
xxo word signifying " to represent,'' was under the necessity of 
employing the auxiliary verb. I now call upon Mr. Maguire to 
meet me upon the question hke a man, and not to beat about 
the bush — to use a vulgar phrase. 

Mr. Maguire. — I hope, gentlemen, you wish to hear more 
than one side of the question ; if you are sincerely anxious to 
know the truth, you will hear both whh equal attention. My 
friend has called upon me to follow him step by step, I thought 
my forte throughout this discussion was the use of argument, and 
iiom the first day up to this moment, I could never keep my 
fnend from preaching sermons, and confine him to the question 
at issue. He denies that any parallelism exists in the cases of 
tiie mysteries of the Incarnation, the Trinity, and Transubstan- 
tiation. But he there calculates without his host — has he 
attempted to show that these doctrines are not mysteries ? Has 
he quoted texts of scripture against me, as I have against him ? 
Has he brought forward a single direct text from scripture 
against me ? One thing is clear, by rejecting transubstantiatiori, 
because it is a mystery^ this gentleman overturns all mysteries, 
a.-^d is become a professed Socinian. He has quoted the evi- 
dence of the senses against transubstantiation. But even if tha> 
doctrine contradicted the senses, he should recollect that the 
senses have nothing to do with regard to a mystery. St. Paul 
says, " Faith then cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word 
of Christ." I call on Mr. Pope to prove that transubstantiation 
is not a mystery — I call upon him to show, that we are not to 
believe the doctrine because it appears opposed to the evidence 
of some of the senses, though we are told that "faith comith 
l*y hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ." We find that 
St. Paul here excludes all the senses as judges of mysteries, 
save the sense of hearing only. If the senses be not constituted 
as the proper judges of mysteries to pronounce upon their truth, 
then all his reasoning as to the evidence of the senses falls to 
the ground. St. Cyrii of Jerusalem brings forward argumenta 
to shew, that the evidence of the senses may be contradicted ifl 
a mystery, and I have quoted St Augusiin, where that holy 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTI ATION.. 229 

Father says, that *' Christ held his body in his own hands." It 
was absurd, then, on the part of niy opponent, to press St. Au- 
gustin in.to an opposition to this doctrine. He has enlarged upon 
the senses as the bulwark of our faith. The senses often contra- 
dict themselves — or rather contradict facts ; thus, Joshua i^eeing 
an angel, mistook him for a man. The woman at the sepulchre 
saw two young men at the tomb, and yet the scnp^'^re tells us 
they were angels, and God appeared in the form of man, and 
yet was taken for a mere man. Here, then, the senses contra- 
dicted themselves. Again, if you immerse a straight^ stick in 
water, you would almost swear, were you to believe your sight, 
that the stick was crooked. In natural things it is very common 
to see the senses contradicted. In the strict sense of the word, 
it is true they are not contradicted, for it is not the business of 
the senses to pronounce judgment according to the principles 
of philosophy ; they are to convey the impressions made upon 
them to the mind — to relate merely what appears to them. In 
respect to the angel and the stick, they merely relate to the 
mind what appears as a fact to them When a man sees what 
is called a wafer, he tastes and smells it ; and here I grant these 
senses contradict his faith. But to the senses we oppose the 
express promises of Christ, and believe with St. Paul that faith 
Cometh by hearing ; and that our Lord bequeathed to man, as a 
test of his love, a most extraordinary but mysterious legacy. As 
Mr. Pope argues that the testimony of the senses is fatal to 
transubstantiation, it remains for him to show, either that it is 
not a mystery, or that faith cometh not by hearing, for no sense 
is allowed to judge of mysteries, but the sense of hearing. Christ 
said, " this is my body." The Apostles heard the words pro- 
nounced, and their sense of hearing was the only judge. We 
have it upon their testimony, that Christ spake the words, con- 
sequently our faith must come from hearing. How will my 
friend prove the doctrine of the Trinity? It contradicts all the 
senses, save that of hearing, so does the doctrine of the Incar- 
nation. If that be the case, if angels be taken for men, and that 
the senses are thus led astray, it is absurd to say that a mystery 
is not to be believed, because it contradicts the senses. Mr. 
Pope has recurred to Melchisedech. I challenged him to show 
that Melchisedech ever offered up sacrifice but on one occasion, 
and yet he is called a priest of the Most High. And Christ is 
called by the royal prophet -^.nd by the Apostle Paul, '• a priest 
for ever according to the order of Melchisedech." Melchisedech 
could not be a priest without offering up a sacrifice. This he 
did when he offered th-s bread and wine ; why were they intro- 
duced ] Evidently to show that he made an offering. Jerome's 
testimony on this matter is preferable to that of Mr. Pope. I 

20 



THE DOCTRINE (V TR INSUBST iVNTI ATION. 

care Lot for the Hebrew originals, as they are called. It w 
admitted by two Protestant divines, Doctors Wall and Millsj 
that the old Italian version is the purest copy extant of the Bible 
I have all the Lutheran churches against Mr. Pope on this 
matter, and all the heretics till the days of BerengaMUS. He 
first denied the doctrine of transubstantiation ; but he died a 
convert, and was heartily sorry for his fatal error. After hiw, 
it is an admitted fact, that Zninglius, in his comment on tho 
irords, " Hoc est corpus meum," substituted the verb ^^repre- 
teniaV- for the verb ** e^^" so that the sense would run, "Ihis 
represents my body.'' And this doctrine he confesses to have 
received from a spectre ; but he adds, " Nescio an aibo, an 
nigro," " I know not whether it was black or white." Luther, 
n the most ferocious manner, attacked Calvin on the subject. 
He maintained the doctrine of the real presence against Calvin 
and ZuingUus; he defied them, as I have defied my friend, to 
disprove that doctrine by arguments drawn from scripture ; he 
describes them as differing from all the churches in the world, 
aj\d from the Lutheran churches in particular. 

My friend has introduced the marriage at Cana in Gallilee, to 
show that there the transubstantiation was made palpable to the 
senses. I am sorry to perceive, that he is unable to distinguish 
between the nature of a mystery and a miracle. Because Christ 
performed a miracle, of which the senses were able to judge, of 
course it follows, that the senses are able to pronounce upon a 
mystery. Oh! profound argument — oh! noble logician. Do 
the doctrines of the Trinity and of the Incarnation fall under the 
judgment of the senses ? If Christ performed miracles to con- 
vert the Jews and Pagans, it must therefore follow, according to 
Mr. Pope, that all mysteries are false. If the Incarnation and 
the Trinity are to be brought under the cognizance of the senses, 
then the doctrine of original sin must be rejected, for it never 
can be understood by man, nor can the senses reconcile it with 
the divine goodness and mercy. 1 introduced the marriage at 
Cana, to show that it is not incompatible with ChrisVs power to 
v;ork the miracle of transubstantiation, because, in one of his first 
miracles, he changed water into wine, which was purely a tran- 
substantiation. But I never introduced that miracle directly to 
prove that he instituted the mystery of transubstantiation at hi-s 
last supper. 

It is a principle in logics that comparisons are not to hold 
throughout all their bearings. As to the passage from Gelasius, 
It remains for Mr. Pope to prove it genume. Hawarden haa 
already answered, that it is doubted amongst critics whether thii 
work was written by Pope Gelasius, or by Gelasius Cyzinicus, 
tiie author of a book " De duabus Christi Naturis." The wri*ei 



THE DOCTRINE OF TR ANSUBST ANTI ATION. 231 

of this book, whoever he was, observes, that because appear 
ances or accidents continue after consecration, we must carefullj 
distinguish between the appearances and the reahty, viz.— the 
body and blood of Christ. His words are — 

** Et tamen esse non desinit substanta vel natura panis et vini.'* 

** And yet the substance or nature of bread and wine does not cease." 

Those words are quite reconcileable with orthodox doctrine, 
fur the substance or nature of bread and wine remains after con- 
secration, as far as the senses are concerned. And that this was 
ihe meaning of Pope Gelasius, (supposing him to have been the 
author) is pretty clear, from his using the disjunctive preposition 
** vel," " or," which certainly qualifies the apparent harshness 
of the sentence. The words substance and nature are not always 
used to express the essential properties of a subject — substance 
is one thing — and the nature of a substance another. Thus a 
stone is a substance, and so is iron but the hardness of the stone 
and the hardness of iron is the nature of the substance. Let 
aay man examine the work itself, and he will find that there is 
nothing in those words inconsistent with the doctrine of transub- 
etantiation. 

My opponent has accused me of misquoting. It shall appear 
'o the world which of us has been convicted of misquotations. 
As soon as this discussion has terminated, and the report of it 
is published, I shall certainly go to Manchester library, and con- 
sult the editions of the Fathers preserved there. Ahhough my 
friend has Trinity College at his back, with all its fellows to 
assist him, it shall then be made manifest, who was the more 
correct in quoting from the Fathers. This gentleman would 
make transubstantiation appear a foolish doctrine, because Christ 
should be present in so many places at once. My opponent is 
truly a wonderful philosopher. May I ask him, can he describe 
the properties of a spiritualized and purified body ? The body 
of our Saviour, after his resurrection passed through the pores 
of a door. Is not that inexplicable ? I should be happy to hear 
Mr. Pope describe the properties of a body spiritualized and of 
a spirit. The Devil himself can be present in many places at 
once — otherwise he could not tempt mankind. According tr 
my principles, and those of every Catholic, it is blasphemy to 
call m doubt the omnipresence of Christ. And will those who 
pretend to venerate the Saviour so much, presume to call it in 
question ? If Christ's humanity be hypostatically united to his 
divinity, does not he who circumscribes the cue, by implication 
circumscribe the other 1 My friend doubts the passages wnich 
I have quoted from Luther, I have here 600 passages more from 
bim, which i espect for the present assembly pre rents me from 



232 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSl ANTIATION. 

quoting now — I have the book here — I can prove the authentic 
city and genuineness of the text — I will publish my quotations 
in the report of the present proceedings — then let the fellows ol 
Trinity College convict me, if they can, of false quotations. 
My friend has quoted the words " Do this in remembrance of 
Hie." The folio wmg is the language of the Latin Vulgate ; 

" Hoc facile in meam commemorationem." " Do this in rememb. anoi 

rtf me." 

St. Paul in the 11th chapter of his first epistle to the Corin 
thians, explains the above thus : 

" Glu >ties cunque enim, manducabitis panem hunc et calicem bibetis mor- 
tem domini anunciabitis, donee veniat." — " For as often as you shall eat this 
breud, and drink this chalice, you shall show forth the death of the Lord until 
he come." 

St. Paul clearly explains what our Lord meant by the words, 
" Do this in remembrance of me," — that is, as often as you do 
this, you will commemorate my death and passion. The reality, 
therefore, of Christ's presence in the sacrament of the altar, by 
no means exclud^s the idea of a commemoration, for although 
the present sacrifice be truly a sacrifice, yet as it is not a bloody 
sacrifice, it may be justly entitled a commemoration of the bloody 
one on the cross. The unbloody sacrifice of the mass is the 
remembrance of the death and passion of Christ, and as often 
as it is celebrated the death and passion of our Lord are shown 
forth until he come. Christ, therefore, was justified in calling n 
in that sense a remembrance, though in the other sense he la 
really present, and is really offeree up. But my friend has 
endeavoured to confuse with figurative expressions the immu- 
table words of scripture. He would leave nothing clear n« 
certain in the Bible. Every thing according to him is to U^ 
taken in a metaphorical sense. Should I attempt to do so, he 
would insist on holding me to the precise terms of the text, and 
when I endeavour to confine him to the strict meaning, he hhjk 
recourse to tropes and metaphors. It is impossible in such a 
way, to prove the falsehood of a doctrine which has been held in 
the church for 1800 years. The Arians, the Manicheans, tba 
Eutychians, and all such noted heretics, never denied the real 
presence of Christ in the sacrament of the altar. 

My friend has quoted the liturgies. I have them here as 
translated by Dr. Brett, a Protestant, and no friend to the Cath- 
olics, and they all prove transubstantiation. Mr. Pope has called 
the Lord's passover the type of Christ. It is admitted on all 
hands, that it was the type of Christ's body. Ought not the 
thing typified exceed in substance and reality the type ? There 
was real blood in the passover. The blood of the lamb wa:* 
ipilled at the doors, and it was a type of the blood of Christ 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSL BSTANTI ATION. 238 

If the type was the real blood of the animal, of course that la 
aiore important which is the antitype — namely, the real blood oi 
Christ — the type is itself the confirmation of the thing typified 
The Jews were told, " eat not blood." 1 ask any man pos* 
j^essed of common sense, if the eating of that which is apparently 
bread and wine, is to be considered in the same light as the 
eating of animal blood ? The Apostle has been quoted, and J 
liever heard a more wilful misinterpretation of scripture. The 
command of the Apostles applied to that only which had all the 
natural appearances of blood. They gave an express com- 
mandment not to eat it, and I therefore called on Mr. Pope to 
show by what authority he was permitted to take gravy, I called 
upon him to prove from the Bible by what authority the sign ot* 
the cross is made in baptism — to prove from the Bible the pro- 
cession of the Holy Ghost — to show why he neglected to wash 
his neighbor's feet, in contradiction to our Saviour's command, 
and why he did not observe the Jewish sabbath. From a notice 
of all those questions he has prudently abstained. You, gentle- 
men, will estimate the value of such prudence. 

But Mr. Pope says, that the body of Christ will never s«:c 
corruption. He should prove, that when the species begin n> 
decay, Christ could not extricate himself and ascended to his 
heavenly Father. Are the rays of the sun polluted by passing 
through an unclean medium ? If that be so in the natural world 
it is foolish to think that Christ could be contaminated by contact 
with corruptible matter. Mr. Pope has quite established the 
Socinian system by his arguments. The Socinian admits no 
principle but reason as his guide — neither does Mr. Pope. The 
Socinian will only interpret the sacred scriptures according t<» 
his private judgment. Mr Pope coincides with him fully ou 
that point. The Socinian rejects transubstantiation, and ail 
mysteries, as contrary to reason. Will Mr. Pope go that length ? 
His arguments certainly tend thereto. Now, I can prove that 
the doctrine of the real presence was not alone retained by 
Luther, but that the doctrine was retained in the church of Eng- 
land until she became Calvinistical. Mr. Pope's argumeiua 
would go to show that no preparation was necessary for the 
re-veiving of the sacrament in the church of England — that no 
moral change was required, and that only a bit of bread and 
wine, instead of the body of Christ, were received in the com- 
munion. Bishop Andrews, in the time of James the first, in 
his answer to Bellarmine, admits that Chrst is present in the 
sacrament )f the altar ; and he adds : 
" I also Wxwh St. Ambrose adore the flesh of Christ in the mysteries." 
Bishop Forbes, De Eucharistia, Lib. ii, Cap. 2, hts tDH 
fallowing remarkable passage ; 

20* 



ZM THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSURSTANTIATION. 

** The sounder Protestants make no doubt of adoring Christ in tlie Eu 
charJM." 

And, 

" It is a monstrous error," says he, " of the rigid Protestants (Calvinists) 
who deny that Christ is to be adored in the Eucharist, except only wili 
an inward adoration of the mind, but not with any outward act of adoration, 
as kneehng, or other hke posture of the body. These people commonly 
haxe not a right belief of Christ in the sacrament, in which he is present afte^ 
I F/ondeiful but real manner." 

Thorndyke says, in lib. iii, cap. 30, page 360 — 

" I suppose the body and blood of Christ may be adored wheresoever they 
are ; and muit be adored by a good Christian, where the custom ofthechurch 
which a Christian is obliged to communicate with, requires it. And is not 
the presence tiereof in the sacrament of the Eucharist, a just occasion pre 
gently to express, by that bodily act of adoration, that inward honour, which 
we always carry tovrards our Lord Christ as God ?" 

And, 

" Not to baulk that freedom, (says he) which hath carried me to pubhshall 
this, I do believe, that it was so practised and done in the ancient church, 
and in the symbols before receiving." 

Dr. Cosin, in stating the doctrines of the church of England, 
says : 

" That God's omnipotency can change one substance into another, none 
vf 11 deny ; and we see it done by Christ in the town of Gallilee, when he 
Changed the water into wine, and it was a true and proper transubstantiation. 
\/e do not say that God is not able to make the body of Christ present, and 
i> aly give it in the sacrament, whilst the substance of the bread remains. 
"We believe a presence and ur^ion of Christ with our soul and body, which 
He know not how to call better than sacramental ; that is effected by eating ; 
that while we eat and drink the consecrated bread and wine, we eat and drink 
therewithal the body and blood of Christ, not in a corporeal manner, but some 
other way, incomprehensible, known only to God, which we call spiritual. 
We confess with the Fathers that this manner of presence is unaccountable 
and past finding out ; not to be searched and pried into by reason, but be- 
lieved by faith. For it is more acceptable to God, with an humble simplicity 
of faith to reverence and embrace the words of Christ (this is my body,) than 
to wrest them violently to a strange and improper sense, or to determine what 
exceeds the capacity of men and angels. We do not find fault with a genera* 
explication of the manner. We confess the necessity of a supernatural and 
heavenly change, and that the signs cannot become sacraments but by the 
infinite power of God. The bread, as I have often said, does not only repre- 
sent the body of our Lord, but also, being received, we are truly made parta- 
kers of that precious body ; for so saith St. Jerome, ' th^ body and blood of 
Christ is made at the prayer of the priest ; that is, the elements so qualified, 
that beincr received, it becomes the communion of the body and blood of 
Ohrist, which it could not without the preceding prayers. And if it seem 
'impossible that the flesh of Christ should descend, and come to be our food 
through so great a distance, we must remember how much the power of the 
1 \o\y Spirit exceeds our sense and our apprehensions, and how absurd it would 
be to undertake to measuie his immensity by onr weakness and narrow capa- 
city, and so make our faith to conceive and believe what our reason cannot 
comprehend. Yet our faith doth not ciiuse, or make that presence, but appre- 
hends it as most truly and really effected by the w^ord of Christ. The faith 
whereby we are said to eat the flesh of Christ, is not that only whereby W6 
believe that h« died for our sir.i, for tUs faith is required and supposed U 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 235 

iib^ed- the sacramental manducation ; but more properly that whereby wa 
bt:iiev€ those words of Christ, 'this is my body.' For in this mystical eating 
by the wonderfiii power of the Holy Ghost, we do invisibly receive th« 
tubstah :e of CkrisVs body and blood, as much as if we should eat and drink 
them h'ith visibly. It remains that we should with faith and humility admira 
this b»^ h and sacred mystery, v/hich our tongue cannot sufficiently explain, 
nor our heart conceive. The presence of Christ in this mystery is not opposed 
to distance but to absence, which only could depnve us of the benefit and 
frn'<ion of the object. As the body and blood of Christ are conveyed by thil 
sacramant to the worthy receiver, so they are offered by it to all, that is truly 
really, and substantially." — {See Dr. Cosines History of Transubstantiaiion 
Aimo. 1676, pages 117, 55, 2, 44, 34, et alibi passim.) 

What says the Book of Common Prayer, sanctioned by Queen 
Elizabeth, on this subject — 

" Grant us so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink 
his blood, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by liis body." 

An«i, in giving the sacrament : — 

" The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preser\ j 
thy body and soul unto everlasting life. The bloodof our Lord Jesus Christ 
v/hich was shed for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting hfe." 

Mr. Pope. — Mr. Maguire, in several of his arguments, hiS 
taken it for granted, that I allowed the doctrine of transubstan- 
tiation to be revealed in the sacred volume. I need scarcely 
remark, that I have made no such concession. Inasmuch as ihe 
mystery of the Trinity does not come under the cognizance of 
our senses, they being incapable of exercising their powers upon 
ihe nature of the Deity, no parallel can be instituted between it 
and transubstantiation. Strange to say, my friend has observed, 
that I have become a Socinian. My letter is before the public 
( ontaining proofs of the essential Godhead of Christ. I fling 
from me, therefore, such a charge — shall I say, with indignation. 

Mr. Maguire has observed, that if transubstantiation be a 
mystery, its being opposed to the evidence of our senses should 
not stand in the way of its reception. The observation which I 
made in the commencement of this speech, will meet this posi- 
tion. Transubstantiation, if revealed, would indeed be a mys- 
tery ; but I beg to assert, that it is not revealed ; it is opposed 
to sense and reason, and is repugnant to the entire tenour of 
scripture. 

My friend has observed, that the senses sometimes contradict 
themselves, and instanced the cases of Joshua, and of the woman 
at the sepulchre, who supposed that the angels who appeared to 
them, were men. The onus is on Mr. Maguire to prove, that 
the angels presented themselves clothed with all the effulgence 
of celestial glory. No — they came in the habit and form ol 
men ; and the senses so far gave a correct testimony. 

Mr. Maguire has spoken of a sticA appearing crooked la 



tS6 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTlATIOPf. 

water. I reply that the sense of touch would rectify that faU 
testimony, as that sense would discover the stick to be straighi 
Mr. Maguire has justly observed, that the senses convey thei 
testimony to the mind and judgment. That testimony, I beg U 
observe, directly refutes the doctrine of transubstantiation. The 
senses bearing witness that the bread is bread, and the wine if 
wine, the judgment pronounces correctly that the bread isbrcau 
and the wine is wine. Permit me also to add, that it scarcelj^ 
ever happens, that all the senses are deceived at the same time 4 
one sense may be deceived, but that is soon corrected by tha 
exercise of some other. 

Mr. Maguire reminds us, that " faith cometh by hearing." 
Faith cometh by reading too. How am I to know, that the words, 
" this is my body," are in the scriptures, if I do not exercise mj 
senses ? But if I am not to exercise my senses upon th% 
elements, perhaps my senses altogether deceive me, when they 
inform me that the words, " this is my body," are contained in 
the sacred records ! The doctrines of the Trinity and of the 
Incarnation are above senee. Man is incompetent to discover 
the modus of God's existence, or to explain hoiv the Deity took 
upon him human flesh ; but tb-e senses of the wise men did not 
deceive them, when they sav' ^xi infant lying in the stable at 
Bethlehem. 

My friend has rung changes on the priesthood of Melchise 
dech. He was a priest — but I have shown that he did not offer 
up bread and wine to God, but brought it forth for the refresh- 
ment of Mraham and his follov^ers ; — his blessing Mraham 
marked out his sacerdotal character. In the 7th chapter of 
Hebrews, Douay Bible, there is no mention made of Melchise- 
dech having broi»ght out bread and wine ; it is simply said, that 
" he blessed Abraham." 

My friend informed us, that he thought nothing of the scrip- 
tures in the original tongues ; yet he has told us, that his church 
will allow them to be read in the originals. Must every old 
woman and every child apply themselves to the study of Greek 
and Hebrew ? Mr. Maguire has observed, that the Italian Bible 
is more perfect than the Vulgate. The Trent doctors ought to 
be much obliged to him for this discovery. Bellarmi'ie indeed 
informs us, that the Fathers teach every ivhere, that the Latin edi* 
Hon of the gospel is to be railed back to the Greek fountains^ and 
that the Latin edition of the Old Testament is to be amended by 
the Hebrew. Some, 'tis true, asserted, when they saw the Latin 
Vulgate printed between the Greek and Hebrew, on the same 
page, that the position of the L^j tin resembled that of the Saviour 
when he was crucified betwee« two thieves. — {Simon Crit. X. f 
UD. 2, 14.) 



THE DOCTRIXE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 237 

But T must not forget that Berengarius, according to Mr 
Maguire, was the first who denied the doctrine of transubstan^i* 
ution. We shall see whether this assertion is correct. My 
opponent informs us, that even the heretics believed in the doc- 
trine of transubstantiation. I go farther — I imagine that tran- 
snbstantiation is of heretical origin, and I now trace it up to 
Eutyches. In the second Dialogue of Theodoret, between an 
orthodox Christian, under the name of Orthodoxus, and a heretic, 
under the name of Eranistes ; the latter maintaining, that the 
humanity of Christ was changed into the substance of the 
Divinity, thus illustrates the matter : — 

" As (says Eranistes) the symbols of the Lord's body and blood are one 
thing before the invocation of the priest, but after the invocation, are changed 
and become another thing, so the body of our Lord, after his ascension, ia 
changed into the divine substance." 

Such was the opinion of Eutyches and his followers. I shall 
not mutilate the passage in reply, though I admit, that the language 
in the latter part of it is strong. 

** Thou art (says Orthodoxus) caught in thme own net ; because the mys- 
tical symbols after consecration do not pass out of their own nature, 

FOR THEY REMAIN IN THEIR FORMER SUBSTANCE, FIGURE, AND APPEAR- 

ikNCE,and may be seen and handled, even as before consecration ; but they 
are understood to be what they become, and they are venerated as being those 
things, which they are believed to be. Compare, therefore, the image with 
the archetype, and you will perceive the resemblance, for the type must needs 
be similar to the truth."— (Dial. 2, Oper. vol. iv, p. 84, 85, Lutet Paris, 1642.) 

I ask, did not Theodoret oppose the doctrine of transubstan- 
tiation, when he calls the Sacrament an image ? He hved in 
le fifth century. Again, Pope Gelasius, as you have seen, also 
note a work, which Mr. Maguire asserts, is spurious, against 
»/\e Eutychian heresy, which seems to have aimed at the intro- 
duction of the doctrine of transubstantiation. 

])id not Ephrem of Antioch, about the middle of the sixth 
century, oppose the doctrine of transubstantiation, when he 
says : 

" No man of common sense will assert that the nature of things palpable 
and imf)alpable, visible and invisible, is the same — thus the body of Christ 

WHICH IS received BY THE FAITHFUL, DOES NOT DEPART FROM ITS OWN 

gENSiBLE SUBSTANCE, though by virtuc of consecration it is united to a spir* 
itual grace ; and thus baptism, though a spiritual thing itself, yet preserves 
the water which is the property of its sensible substance ; it loses not what it 
•vas before." — Ephrem Antioch. Cont. Eutych. A pud Phot. Cod. 229. 

Facundus, in the 6th century, says : 

" The sacrament of adoption may be called adoption, just as the sacrament 
of the body and blood of Christ, which is the consecrated bread and vy^ine, we 
are wont to call his body and blood. JsTot indeed that the bread ii properly hi» 
hodyy or that the wine is properly his blood, but because they cor^in the mys- 
tery of his body and bUtod within themselves ; hence it w%8 that our Lorj 



238 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIAi ION. 

denominated the consecrated bread and wine which he delivered to his disci 
pies, in his own body and blood." — (Facund. Defens.Coiicil. Chaloid.lib. ]<, 
c 4, open p. 144.) 

Was not Facund us, in the sixth century, opjuvsed to th€ 
doctrine of transubstantiation? 

Further — Rabanus Maurus, archbishop of Mentz, about the 
year 847, reciting the very words of Paschasius Radbert, of 
Corby, in which he broached the doctrine of transubstantiatiofi^ 
has this remarkable passage. Before, however, I read the 
quotation, permit me to remark, that Bellarmine and Sirmondus 
allow, that Paschasius was the first who wrote a regular treatise 
•ipon transub&tantiation. Bellarmine says, 

"This author was the first who had seriously and copiously written c>^n' 
cerning the ♦xuth of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist." — (De ScrijHor 
Eccles.) 

Sirmondus thus — 

" He so first explained the genuine sense of the Catholic church, that he 
opened the way to the rest, who afterwards in great numbers wrote upon the 
Bame argument,"-— (In vita Paschasii.) 

The archbishop of Mentz, in the nmth century, writes, 

" Some (says he) of late, not having a right opinion concerning the sacra- 
ment of the body and blood of our Lord, have said that this is the body and 
blood of our Lord, which was born of the Virgin Mary, and in which our 
Lord suffered upon the cross and roso from the dead ; which error (says 
he) WE HAVE OPPOSED WITH ALL OUR MIGHT." — (Epist. ad Hcribaldum, c. 3^.) 

Transubstantiation was also opposed by Heribaldus, Bishcp 
of Auxerres in France, by John Scotus Erigena, (which means 
an Irishman) and Bertram of Corby. Bertram tells us in his* 
preface, that 

" They who according to their several opinions talked of the difficulties 
about Christ^s body and blood, were divided with no small schism." 

My friend has seen that Eutyches, the heretic, believed in 
transubstantiation, and that the doctrine was opposed by several 
writers, without any ecclesiastical fulmination having been 
directed against them. Even the second councd of Ni:e, as 
has been already observed, declared, as one reason^ for worship- 
ing the image of Christ, that he is not sensibly present on eaith, 
and anathematized all who asserted, that Christ was not circum- 
scribed as to his humanity. Several Roman Catholic writers 
virtually admit the modern origin of transubstantiation. Scotus 
allows, that the doctrine was not always considered as necessary 
to be believed, but that the necessity of believing it was conse- 
quent to the declaration of the church made in the council of 
Lateran, under Pope Innocent III. — In sent. L. 4, Dist 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 289 

Durandus frankly discovers his inclination, 

" To have believed the contrary, if the church had not by that determina* 
lion obliged men to beheve it." — In sent. L. 4, Dist. 1 1, CI. 1, N. 15. 

Tonstal, Bishop of Durham, also admits, that 

" Before the fourth Lateran council, men were at liberty as to the mannei 
of Christ's presence in the sacrament." — De Euchar. lib. i, p. 146. 

Erasmus, who lived and died in the Roman church, and than 
whom no man was better acquainted with the ancient Fathers, 
confesses that it was 

" Late before the church defined tran substantiation, unknown to the ancienti 
both name and thing-." — 1 Epist. ad Corinth, c. 7, Citante etiam Salmerone, 
torn. 9, tract 16, p. 168. 

Alphonsus a Casiro says, that 

" Concerning the tran substantiation of the bread into the body of Christ, 
there is seldom any mention in the ancient writers." — De Haeres. hb. 8. 

In connection with this subject, I meet the strange position of 
my friend relative to the Waldenses, namely, that they believed 
in transubstantiation, by a quotation from JVIilner^s End of Con* 
iroversy : 

" It is incontestible, and carried to the highest degree of moral evidence, 
that all Christians, of all the nations of the world, Greeks as well as Latins, 
Africans as well as Europeans, except Protestants, and a handful of Vau- 
Dois peasants, have in all ages believed, and still believe in the Real Presence 
and Transubstantiation." — London, 1824, 5th edit. p. 273. 

Here Milner distinctly admits, that the Vaudois or Waldenses 
did not believe in transubstantiation. 

The following is an extract from their Confession of Faith 
which was read publicly before Francis I, of France : 

** We believe, that the holy sacrament of our Lord Jesus Christ's table u 
a sacred memorial and aii act of thanksgiving, for the benefits which we have 
received by the death of Christ ; and that it ought to be celebrated in the 
assembly of the saints, in faith and charity, and by an inward experience of 
Christ's merits. It is thus, by partaking of the bread and wine, we have 
communion with the body and blood of Christ, as we read in the holy 
scriptures." 

Again, we read in the Confession of Faith of 1120. — Leger's 
History, p. 92. 

** We believe, that after this life there are only two places, one for tho saved, 
which is called JParadise, and one for the damned, which is called Hell, utterly 
denying that feigned purgatory of Antichrist, invented in opposition to truth." 

" We believe that the sacraments are signs or the visible forms of hoW 
things." 

Did they offer masses for souls in purgatory, when they did 
not believe in its existence? I have referred to their standard 
formularies ; and any one who will examine their history, as 
given by Mr. Gillie, will find additional proofs that they protested 
againr^t the sacrifice of the mass. 



240 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

Luther, Mr. Maguire says, is on his side. This is the first 
time in which I have heard, that consubstantiation is the same 
with transubstantiation. I confess, I am somewhat surf>rised, 
that most of the early reformers were enabled so easily to throw 
off ^'w toil a doctrine which so closely adheres to persons brought 
up ir the pale of the church of Rome. I do not jusdfy the lan- 
guage which Luther employed when condemning those who 
w.'ote against his principles. Mr. Maguiie has stated, that it is 
t spiritual body which is offered up in the mass. Does this 
j)pinion agree with the council of Trent? The council informs 
as that — 

" In the sacrifice of the mass, the same Christ is cotitained and uiibloodily im- 
molated, who once offered himself bloodily on the cross,^"* Sess. 22. ch. 2, 

Was it a spiritual body that suffered on Calvary? I deny 
that the devil is omnipresent. His influence is extended by the 
agency of innumerable spirits who are under his control. I did 
not circumscribe the presence of Christ. I believe, that, where 
two or three meet together in his name. He is in the midst of 
them. But, though he be present through the universe in his 
divinity, yet the heavens will receive his manhood till the time 
of the restitution of all things. — Acts, iii, 21. I have here the 
book of Sir Edwin Sandys. Mr. Maguire did not accept my 
offer, that a Protestant and a Roman Catholic should examine 
the work. Let them compare mine with Mr. Maguire's edition, 
and they will find mine to be the original volume. 

My friend has talked of my having Trinity college at my 
back : it was not handsome to speak is this style. When Mr. 
Maguire expressed a wish to obtain access to a public Ubrary, 
( requested a friend to introduce him at Marsh's library ; and 
/ informed Mr. Maguire, that my friend was ready to accom- 
/any him thither. Did this circumstance look as if I wished to 
take any unfair advantage of Mr. Maguire ? The passover, my 
opponent obs^erves, was a type of Christ. The Lamb in the 
passover was indeed a type of the Saviour, not in transub- 
stantiation, but of the body on Calvary. The passover was 
?>erhaps typical of the feast of the eucharist, which God's people 
celebrate in commemoration of their dying, risen, and glorified 
Redeemer. 

Mr. Maguire. — I have caughi my friend, Mr. Pope, in the 
act of using garbled quotations. I have already asserted that 
be took his quotations obsteiricante many^ and I now insist that 
I have detected him in making a false quotation. Before 1 
shall expose either his disingenuity, or, what 1 rather suspect, 
his want of industry, I shiU for a moment recur to the work as- 
cribed to Gelasius, and give you the rea.sont' which are assigae<J 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 24 

to prove that it is not genuine. Pope Gelasius's work against 
Eutyches, is described by Genadius, lib. de. viris illust. cap. 14, 
as " Grande et prczclarum vohimen." Now, in the first place, 
the present work is in no wise deserving of such a character. 
Secondly, in his Catholicorurn Testimonia Magistrorum, he 
every where praises the Arians, and is profoundly silent about 
the orthodox Fathers. These considerations amount to a strong 
f lispicion, that it could not have proceeded from the pen of Pope 
( relasius, and it is therefore rationally considered as the produc- 
tion of Gelasius Cyzinicus. 

I will now read to you the dialogue of Theodoret, who has 
been introduced as opposed to the doctrine of transubstantiation ; 
let the following serve as a preface. He says, 

*' Christ at his last supper showed the true original of which this Paschal 
Lamb was a type ; opened the gates of the holy sacrament ; and ^ave his 
most precious body and bloody not only to the eleven Apostles, but also to the 
traitor Judas. These words, " He shall be guilty of the body and blood of the 
Lord," mean this, that as Judas betrayed him, and the Jews insulted him, so 
they offer him a very great affront who take his most holy body with unclean 
hands and put it into a defiled mouthJ''* — In 1 Cor. cap. H. 

There is not any thing surely there contrary to the doctrine 
f>f transubstantiation. He proceeds to say, in his second dia- 
)ogue, immediately after the words quoted by Mr. Pope — **The 
3lements, after consecration, are to be adored.^^ But Mr. Pope 
took good care to foist upon us the word venerate for the word 
adore^ as if Theodoret had said, th( elements after consecration 
are to be venerated^ whereas he ej.pressly ^ays, they are to be 
adored. Mr. Pope, in his version, has substituted the word 
'^ venerated^^ for the word " adored " I charge him with a griev- 
ous mangling of the text. Adort d is the word, as will be found 
Dy a reference to the originaL If Theodoret denied transub- 
stantiation, would he say that vne elements of bread and wine 
after consecration are to be adored? Surely he would not tell 
us to adore a piece of bread and a drop of wine. Mr. Pope 
therefore should consign to execration the author by whom he 
was misled, for I am unwilling to believe that he would himself 
so distort the original, and seek to palm upon an unsuspecting 
public a text so monstrously garbled. 

Theodoret in his dialogue, introduces Orthodoxus (a Catholic) 
and Eranistes (a heretic) disputing uwon the Eucharist. Hav- 
ing previously disputed about the Eutychian heresy, concerning 
(he two natures of Christ, (the Eutychians contending that the 
kumaniiy was absorbed in the divinity^) Eranistes puts the fol- 
lowing questions to Orthodoxus : — 

"EI&ANiSTKs, — How do you call these (the elements) after consecration? 
Orthodoxus, — Th. k0dy and blood of Christ. 

21 



842 TMisi L?ot;i«i>«E OF TRAN8UBSTANT1&.TI0N. 

Er. — Do you believe that you perceive the body and >lood of ChriutT 

Or, — I do believe it. 

Er. — Why are the names changed ? 

Or. — The reason is evident to those who understand the mystery ; «ai 
Christ would not have us regard the nature of what we see, but as the namef 
of the elements are changed, so to apprehend by faith the change which ii 
made in them by grace. The mystical symbols after consecration dc not 
depait from their own nature, but they are understood to be the things wkick 
they are made, and so they are believed^ and they are adored as being the ihing$ 
which they are believed,^^ 

Thus, it must be said, that Theodoret urged the idolatroiia 
mdoration of mere bread and wine, or that he beheved and taught 
tlie doctrine of transubstantiation. 

What are the things to be believed when the body and blooc' 
are adored? Is it to be believed that they remam bread ana 
wme ? What a wonderful effort of faith truly ! But Ortho- 
doxus tells us, that the things believed are to be adored. 

The Fathers all agree in the doctrine of transubstantiation, 
and anathematize all those who controvert that doctrine. With 
regard to the parallel between Transubstantiation and the Trin- 
ity, my friend denies its existence, but I call upon him to prove 
that transubstantiation is not a mystery, as Theodoret calls it. 
He denies that transubstantiation is founded upon scripture. 
Christ, the eternal Son of a good and gracious God, made 3 
wonderful promise in the sixth chapter of St. John, shall we 
say, after reading that solemn and divine promise, that he left 
nothing to us but a mere bit of bread and wine ! Is it not evi- 
dent, that he intended to leave with us a grand and noble gift 
worthy of the Testator, and in accordance with his omnipotence? 
Yet, if we are led by the Calvinistic doctrines, propounded by 
Mr. Pope, we must believe that he intended only to bequeath to 
us a mere bit of bread, and a drop wine ! Would that be wor- 
thy of the Deity ? Can such a belief be reconciled with the 
facts recorded in scripture 1 There we find that he raised the 
expectations of his disciples to the highest pitch, and that many 
of them went away shocked at his expressions. He did rx)t 
correct their error, if such it were. When he came to his last 
supper, what did he say? There, while solemnly seated with 
his apostles, he raised his eyes to heaven, he took bread in hia 
hands, blessed it, and broke it saying, " Take ye and eat— 
THIS IS MY BODY." 

It is not my custom to lose my temper, and to indulge in harsh 
and angry expressions — I will not say, that I fling back with 
indignation any of the charges brought forward by my opponent. 
I have been taught to exercise a self-control, and 1 know that 
GUI Saviour tells us — *' Love your enemies ; do good to there 
that hate you ; bless them that curse you, and pray for them that 
eaJunuiiate you ! And to him that striketb thee on one cheek 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. S^t 

pffer also the other." This is the practical part of Christianity 
It accords not with the suggestions of flesh and blood, nor with 
the maxims of modern gospel liberty. Ahnega teipsum is th** 
precept of the gospel, though it may form no portion of Mr. 
Pope's moral creed, By my forbearance upon this occasion^ 
I shall furnish Mr. Pope with, at least, one instance of Christian 
humility. I may here remark, that one of the newspapers has, 
in the report of a former day's discussion, represented me as 
appropriating to myself, that which I quoted as the language of 
our Saviour — " Learn of me, because I am meek and humble 
of b.':^art." 

With regard to the senses, my friend has said, that they can- 
not all contradict themselves. But a portion may, and I made 
an exception for the sense of hearing. I referred in support of 
that portion to St. Paul—" Faith cometh by hearings and hear- 
ing by the words of Christ." — (Rom. x, 17.) Hearing then iwj 
the only sense constituted as a judge of mysteries. But I ask, 
did not all the senses contradict themselves, when our Saviour 
walked upon the waters, and it is recorded of his disciples — 
" Piitaverent Phardasma esse.^^ Did not the senses here deceive 
the Apostles, as they did others, in several cases in the Old Tes- 
tament] They did not contradict themselves in the strict sense 
of the word. The matters which they related were not founded 
on fact, but they related what appeared to themselves. So far 
their relation was correct. My friend says, that the mistake 
into which the sense of sight falls as to the stick in the water 
may be corrected by the sense of touch. But if one sense con 
tradicts another in rebus natur alihus^ how much more likely tc 
do so in things of a supernatural order 1 

He asks me how do I know that Christ spoke the words, 
'* This is my body" — which he has unsuccessfully endeavoured 
to explain away. I answer, that I depend here upon the au- 
thority of the church of Christ. Mr. Pope depends on the trans- 
lators of the Bible in the reign of James I. I place my reliance 
upon an authority to which our divine Redeemer expressly pro- 
mised infallibility. Mr. Pope believes in no church, but relies 
ipon his own private judgment. I called upon him to show how 
% P:otestant could, according to his principles, make an act of 
feith. Has he ever answered the question 1 

He n^curs to Melchisedech. But here I have him caught in 
his own net, as in the instance of Theodoret. He says that 
Melchisedech made no offering — I proved that he made an offer- 
ing of bread and wine. St. Jerome maintains the same opinion, 
and St. Paul evidently alludes to it when he speaks of our 
Saviour being " a priest for ever according to the order of Mel- 
ehisedech." Mr. Pope talks of my admission, that the4e 4s na 



244 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIAT. ON. 

prohibftion to the reading of the scriptures in the three sacred 
languages, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, because port ^ns of scrips 
ture have been published in each of them. In respect to the 
vulgar tongues, the church never prohibited the reading of tb€ 
Bciptures in them. She restricted the right where she though 
it would be abused ; she restricted it in order to prevent the 
multiplication of heresies, and the generation of sects, such as 
the Anabaptists, the Muggletonians, and hundreds of others, who, 
like a swarm of locusts, or the ten plagues of Egypt, infest the 
country, distract the community, and rend asunder the Protes- 
tant churches. It was to guard against such evils that the 
Catholic church wisely forbade the indiscriminate reading of the 
scriptures. Mr. Pope has accused our translation of the Bible 
as being filled with various errors. Yet when the "saints" travel 
through the country, they would persuade the poor people that 
there is no difference between our Bible and theirs. But when 
they come to speak to scholars on the subject, they will have it 
that thousands of errors exist in our Bible. They then openly 
tell rank falsehoods to promote their cause — I do not accuse 
Mr. Pope of rank falsehood. But is it not evident from this, 
khat there is neither honour nor veracity amongst the generahty 
of the ** saints "? He says, that by reason of the admissions 
which I have made, I would be called to an account if an inqui- 
sition existed in this country ; and that moreover I would be 
excruciated for my heterodoxy. But Protestants are in general 
very little acquainted with our religion. They have through 
their ignorance transformed our faith into an hideous caricature. 

He says that the Italian version was admitted by me to be 
superior to the Latin Vulgate. I deny the assertion. I said, 
that the Italian version was admitted to be the purest copy of the 
Pible extant — it was for that reason that St. Jerome, as he ad- 
mits in his preface, followed the Italian version, and upon it laid 
the foundation of the Latin Vulgate. Where is the contradic- 
tion now^? 

Mr. Pope quoted a Catholic writer to prove that Christ was 
oot sensibly present in the sacrament. I never said that Christ 
was sensibly present in the sacrament. Let Mr. Pope remem- 
06r that Scotus, the author from whom he quotes, was condem- 
ned by the Catholic church for many of his positions, w hich are 
fill from being deemed orthodox. As to Erasmus, there are 
gome of his opinions not very orthodox, though he, like Henry 
VIII, thought it safest to die in the Catholic church. — Like 
many of the present day, who, in the enjoyment of youth and 
riches, cast their derisions at Popery, and yet are glad, when 
Iheir end approaches, to return to the mother church. 

Mr. Vom ntroduces Durandus. It .a true he held 09inio«f 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTaNTI ATION. 2 4A 

fontrary to those of the church, till the definition of the churci 
was declared. Then he yielded as he ought to the authority of 
the Catholic church, as the illustrious Fenelon did in later days. 
I asserted that the first of the Waldenses preserved the sacrific€ 
of the mass. But their followers changed their principles, as 
those of Luther and Calvin did ; the Lutherans preaching one 
doctrine and the Calvinists another. Here, for instance, Mr, 
Pope admits only eighteen out of the thirty-nine articles of the 
church of England — others v/ill he found to deny them alto* 
gether, and more will reject the Anthanasian creed. Such are 
the multiplied gradations produced by evangelical liberty and 
private judgment. It is found necessary by Mr. Pope to con- 
nect himself with with the Waldenses (perhaps the maddes^ of 
all heretics.) I would beg leave to ask him., had the Waldv^n- 
ses a church, a ministry, a liturgy, or any other mark of the true 
church of Christ, or indeed of any church at all, and if not, from 
whom did he receive the scriptures? I must here remark, that 
his obtrusive connexion with the Waldenses cannot add respect- 
ability to his origin. The Waldenses were one rotten branch 
lopped from the parent trunk by the Catholic church. I regret 
extremely I did not bring the ecclesiastical tree along with me. 

[Here Mr. Pope ha-ided to Mr, Maguire Dr, Milner''s " End of Controversy,^^ 
containing the ecclesiastical tree.] 

Oh ! I perceive, gentlemen, to my great surprise, that this 
tree, instead of exhibiting a naked trunk, is weighed down by 
those branches which I thought had been cut off, but which 
seem determined to cling with desperation to that parent stock 
upon which alone th; ir vitality depends, but from which they can 
never more receive sap or nutriment, by means of that moral 
separation which originated with themselves. Here are Cerinthus, 
Arius, Montanus, Apollinaris, Manicheus, Eutyches, Pelagius, 
Socinus, Huss, Wickliffe, Waldo, Luther, Cranmer, struggling 
to connect themselves with the Catholic church, and claiming, 
upon some occasions, a sympathetic relationship with each other. 
How, now, Mr. Pope, will you or the present Protestant church 
be able to ^itch yourselves to those various heretics ? Were 
they, I demand, or were they not, more different from the prin- 
ciples of the present reformers than they were from the Catholic 
church ; and would not the ancient heretics anathematize Mr, 
Pope and his doctrines as jealously as the Catholic chiirch 
herself? 

Before I conclude, I will give you a few additional quotationa 
from the Fathers, touching the faith of the primitive church. 
St. Cyril of Alexandria, commenting on John, torn, iv, p. 252, 
after quoting the words of St. John, " I am the living bread liiai 
came down from heaven," — (vi, 5L) 

21* 



246 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

" The manna was the type, the shadow, and the image. *1 am thft liv n| 
bread, if any one shall eat of this bread, he shall live for ever.' They tViat 
eat of the manna are dead, because it gave not life; he that eats this bread, 
that is me, or my flesh, shall live for ever. Our Lord Jesus, by his own f^esh, 
gives life to us, and his blood is not that of any common man, but the natural 
blood of life itself ' For he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth 
in me and I in him.' — (John, vi, 56.) As he that joins wax to wax forms of 
them one body, so it seems to me, he that eats the flesh of our Saviour, and 
drinks his precious blood, as himself savs, becomes one with him. Let these 
Verbose and absurd men tell us with whose body the sheep of the church are 
?cH, or from what springs her children are refreshed. For if the bcdy of God 
6 (Jelivered, thus God is the true God, Christ the Lord, not a mere man, nor 
in angel, as some pretend. And if it be the blood of God, the cup of God, 
this God is not purely God, one of the adorable Trinity, the Son of Goa but 
the Wo^'d of God 'nade man. But if the body of Christ be our food, and the 
blood of Chris! mi drink, and this Christ be a mere man, how is eternal life 
promised to those who approach the holy table ? And how again shall this 
body be divided here, and in many places, and not be diminished ? A mere 
body cannot impart life to those who receive it. Wherefore let us receive the 
b. jdy of life itself; that life which for us has dwelt in our body : and let us 
drink his sacred blood for the remission of our sins, and so partake of that 
immortality which is in him ; believing Christ to be the priest and the victim, 
him that oflfers, and he that is oflTered." 

St. John Chrysostom, Horn, ii, ad Pop. Antioch, I. i, p. 37 — 

"Elias left his garment to his disciple : but the Son of God left us his own 
flesh. The prophet, indeed, threw ofT his covering, but Christ ascending, 
took with him his body and left it also for us. Let us not therefore repine, 
nor fear any difiiculties, for he who refused not to shed his blood for all, and 
communicated to us his body and blood, what will he not do for our salvation ?" 

And, Horn, ii, in cap. 14. Matt, i, 7. — 

" Let us then touch the hem of his garment, or rather let us, if we be so 
t^isposed, possess him entire, for his body now lies before us, not to be touched 
oaly, but to be eaten and to satiate us. iVnd if they who touched his garment 
drew so much virtue from it, how much more shall we draw who possess him 
whole ? When, therefore, thou seest the priest presenting the body to thee, 
think not that it is his hand, but the hand of Christ that is stretched towards 
thee." 

So, gentlemen, that objection of Mr. Pope is here fully 
answered, viz, — that the priest made his God- -for here St. 
Chrysostom declares, that the action is not performed by man, 
but by Christ himself— which agrees with St. Cyril, that Christ 
ia both the priest and the victim. 

Mr. Pope. — My friend has drawn a strange distinction between 
i'Utward appearances and species. The schoolmen, borrowing 
from oiristotle, introduced a curious fancy ; they supposed, that 
the universe consisted of a mass of matter, invested by certain 
forms and quaUties which possess a real and substantial being. 
This was a very fortunate discovery for the school divines ; it 
served to explain the bodily presence of Christ in the sacrament; 
the Si ibstance of the bread and wine, said they, is converted into 
his body and blood ; but the absolute accidents, the substantia. 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATlON. 24* 

forn s of both remain as before ; hence the term transubstantia- 
lion. Now surely it is most ridiculous to assert, that that which 
has all the properties of bread, should not be bread ; and that 
that which has none of the properties of flesh, should be flesh. 
1 am not quite so certam that the gravy is the blood of the 
animal ; however, I congratulate Mr. Maguire upon the striol 
observance of the washing of feet in the church of Rome. Upor. 
a certain day, I am informed that a golden ewer is prepared, and 
the Pope washes the feet of some mendicants. I wish to know 
does Mr. Maguire follow the example of his holmess at Rome 

My friend observes, that Christ can extricate himself from the 
elements, if likely to corrupt. Let us examine the Roman 
^ilissal upon this head. 

** tr* through negligence any part of the blood of Christ should fall upon th« 
ground or upon the table, let it be Ucked up, and let the place be sufficiently 
scraped, and the scrapings burned, but let the ashes be buried in holy grounc. 
But if it should fall upon the stone of the altar, let the priest drink up the drop, 
and let the place be well washed, and the washing thrown into holy ground, 
[f the drop should reach the first, second, and third hnen-cloth, let the cloths 
be three times washed where the drop fell, the chalice having been placed 
under, and let the water of ablution be thrown into holy ground. But if it 
should fall only on the sacerdotal vestments themselves, they ought in the 
same manner be washed, and the washing thrown into holy ground. If it 
should fall upon the cloth or the carpet placed underneath the feet, let it be 
well washed as before. If it should happen, that all the blood should be 
poured forth after consecration, if indeed any, even a little, shall remain, let 
that be taken, and let that which has been mentioned be done with the 
remainder of the blood. But if none shall remain, let the priest place wine 
in the chalice again, and let him consecrate it from that place 'likewise after 
supper ;' the oblation, however, of the chalice having been made as before 
If the priest should disgorge the eucharist, if the ssecies should appear entire, 
let them be reverently taken, if nausea does not prevent; in that case, let 
the consecrated species be cautiously separated, and laid up in some secret 
place, until they become corrupted ; and afterwards let them be thrown into 
holy ground. But if the species do not appear, let that be burned which has 
been disgorged, and the ashes thrown into holy ground. If the consecrated 
host, or any part of it, fall upon the ground, let it be reverently taken up, anj 
the place where it fell, cleansed, and a Httle scraped, and let the dust, o 
scrapings of that nature, be thrown into holy ground. If it should fall with- 
out the corporal upon the napkin or in any manner upon any cloth, let the 
napkin or cloth be carefully washed, and let the washing itself be poured out 
tfon holy ground." — De defect, circ. Miss. occ. Miss. Rom. 1822, Dubl. 

Pardon me for having read so much, and excuse me for not 
reading the whole. I wonder, why such a process should be 
enjoined, if the Saviour's body is supposed not to be present 
afl3r the decomposition of the elements I 

I have already proved, that the difficulty of convincing the 
Socinian, is greater on the part of Mr. Maguire than on mine. 
[ observed, that I could argue on the scriptures, as acknowledged 
by the Socinian, while my friend would refer him to the universa* 
tonsent of mankind. Now we have shown, that Arianism at ont 



248 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION, 

period prevailed in the church of Rome ; the Sociniun wilil, 
therefore, reply, that he too has tradition on his side ; he will 
therefore wish Mr. Maguire good morning, when he introduce* 
the infallibility and authority of his church. Il* my friend's 
quotations from Protestant bishops be correct, I can only say 
that they were not true to their principles, for the articles of the 
established church, emphatically assert, that the elements should 
not be adored. We are told, that there is a difference between 
a mystery and a miracle. Let the opinion go forth, and stand 
as a ruled case, that there is no miracle in transubstantiation. 
Some of the Fathers, I allow, used strong expressions respect- 
mg the eucharist. If Theodoret beheved in transubstantiation, 
he could not have met, in the way in which he does, the argu- 
ment of Eutyches. He spoke of a morale but not a physical 
change, and conceived that the moral change, which, he believed, 
took place, entitled the elements to respect and veneration, 
Mr. Maguire asks, did Christ leave behind him nothing but 
bread and wine 1 Yes ; he has bequeathed to his people the 
records of inspiration, which bear witness to his glorious work 
on Calvary, when he bowed his head and gave up the ghost. I 
asked Mr. Maguire, how he knew that the words, " this is mv 
body," are to be found in the Bible. I am told, by the authority 
of his church. Now% the examination of the proofs of thi/t 
authority, demands the exercise of sense ; and if so, why shouU 
not the same exercise of sense be admitted upon transubstantia 
tion ? I employed strong language, 'tis true, in refutation of th^ 
charge which Mr. Maguire brought against me — but believe m^*, 
I did not speak under the impulse of passion. Mr. Maguifti 
has directed me to himself as an example of humility. I appt)M 
to the present meeting, whether we have not had a singu^f 
exhibition of effrontery on his part, in defiance of common sens -» 
and rational argumentation 1 My friend has referred us to thj 
instance of the Saviour having been taken for a spirit ; but he 
should remember, that at the moment the Apostles did not dis- 
tinctly see him ; but as soon as they heard his voice^ they cried 
out, "it is the Lord." As to an act of faith being made by a 
Protestant, I shall not go over the same ground so often travelled 
before. Mr. Maguire observes, that St. Paul applies the temi 
priest to Melchisedech : but this circumstmce does not prove 
the bread and wine to have been a sacrifice. The truth of this 
observation can be seen, as I have already said, by cor suiting 
the Old Testament. I called upon Mr. Maguire to prove, that 
the term >sq6vg^ a sacrificing priest, was ever applied to the min- 
isters of Christ in the new dispensation ; he has not met that 
question. I again assert, that there is no tsqevg on earth, pos- 
f easing any authority under the Christian dispensation. Thi 



THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANl lATION. 24b 

pnesthood of Christ is unchangeable, and therefore not to be 
transferred ; that of the Jews was changeable, because they wer« 
subject ^1 death. The priesthood is now concentrated in him, 
who sits for ever on the right hand of the Majesty in the Hea- 
vens. My friend has remarked, that Protestants assert, thai 
thcrf* i?. no difference between the Roman Catholic and Protes- 
tant BiOle ; the Douay version, I admit, though corrupted, stili 
lelains fundamental truths. You shall hear Dr. Doyle's opinion 
of the Protestant translation : — 

*'Gl. Do you consider the authorized translation of the church i,f England 
as of a s^ifficiently perverse quality, to merit the description, (given in tha 
encyclioai letter ot the Pope, dated Rome, May 3, 1824, — that by a perverse 
interpretation, the gospel of Christ may be turned into a human gospel, or 
what is worse, into the gospel of the devil ?) 

^* A. As I said before, God forbid I should so consider it ; for though it has 
many errors, / consider it one of the noblest translations that ever has been pro^ 
duced; this, I say, while looking upon it, as abounding with inaccuracies, 
And having many errors." — App. to Report for Com, on Education in Ireland^ 
p. 791. 

In the opinion of Dr. Doyle, we perceive, that the authorized 
version is one of the noblest translations that ever has been pro- 
duced. I still insist, that, in several instances, the translations 
in the authorized version, regarded by Ward as erroneous, have 
been adopted by Dr. Murray, in his edition of the Douay Bible 
lately published. (See Hamilton's Letters to the Ronaan 
Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, on the State of the present 
English R. C. Bible.) 

Mr. Maguire persists in saying, that the Waldenses believed 
in transubstantiation. In refutation of the assertion, I have 
read to you extracts from their creeds, and a passage from Dr. 
Milner's End of Controversy. You have heard much of the 
Apostolic tree in Dr. Milner. You will find, upon examination, 
however, that the mention of some Popes is altogether omitted. 
To change the metaphor — I should like to know, when the links 
were broken in the ApostoUc chain, for instance, at the time of 
the council of Constance, by what process the spiritual Vulcan 
was able to join them together again ? My friend has talked of 
the Waldenses being heretics. I have already referred you to 
the commendation of Lewis XII, and the report of his commis- 
fioners which prove that the Waldenses held the truths of the 
hlessed gospel As to Mr. Maguire's quotation from Luther, ] 
I an prove that that which Mr. Maguire says, was a literal con- 
versation with the devil, is merely figurative. Sagittarius proves, 
Ihat Justus Jonas, Luther's colleague, who translated this piece 
jf Luther's writings into Latin, left out many words, particulari) 
Ihe following passage : 

" Jlffo corde^ maltas enim noctet mihi ecerbaa ftciL'* 



e50 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATIOH. 

Which ought immediately to follow the first sentence— 
" Satan mecum coipit ejusmodi disputationem." 
So that in English the translation should be : 
" Satan began with me in my heart the following disputation." 

As to the quotations from the works of other reformers tvhica 
Mr. Maguire adduced, the places where they may be found, no? 
having been stated by him, I may truly say that they ai*e so 
absurd as to carry their own refutation upon their very face. 

With respect to the doctrine of transubstantiation : I have 
shown that our Saviour did not always speak literally — that he 
frequently employed figurative language — that there is a figuie 
in the very context — that the Syriac language possesses no word 
meaning to signify., and that therefore our Lord was under the 
necessity of using the auxiliary verb. 1 observed that, if tran- 
substantiation be true, we can have no proof of the resurrection 
of Christ — that it destroys the nature of a sacrament, and con- 
tradicts the scripture which asser*s, that the body of Christ shall 
not see corruption. I have appealed to the Fathers ; let our 
quotations be confronted. There is a suspicion that the Father& 
have been corrupted by the church of Rome ; but the Protes- 
tants possess no index expurgatorius. I would ask, what is the 
use of the doctrine of transubstantiation ? Can the body and 
blood of Christ, literally received into the body, benefit the soul? 
Christ suffered in his body on the cross, and in that respect his 
flesh has profited, from its union with the Godhead. But did I 
submit to be a cannibal, I should yet have to learn, by what 
process an immaterial spirit can be benefited by a m.aterial sub- 
stance. I appeal to your judgments ; which is most in accord- 
ance with common sense, reason, scripture, and the character of 
Grod, — the doctrine which holds that a man eats his Redeemer, 
or that which teaches, that the soul is fed, not by eating the 
symbols of the body and blood of Christ, but by the truths con- 
tained in the word of God 1 If the early Christians believed 
such a doctrine, I ask, would it not have been brought forward 
as a charge against them by anti- Christian writers ? — (Iren» 
Fragm.. ap. CEcum. in 1 Pet. ii, 12.) Yet such a charge was 
never njade. 

My friend has accused me of not being under the influence 
of moral principle. Let our lives be contrasted, and then will 
It be seen which of the 'wo is most influenced by Christian prin- 
ciple. If Mr. Maguii 3 would read the works of Luther, he 
would find, that although Lutner would lay no other foimdation 
tnan that which has been laid, which is Christ Jesus the Lord, 
jret he delighted to erect upon that basis such a moral edifice aa 
dhould be to the praise and the glory of the most high God. i 



THE DOCTRINE OF TR aNSL EST ANTIATION. 251 

naintahi that in the New Testament leqevg is never app]i£;d tc 
Christian ministers ; and I argue aga'nst the Roman Catholic 
priesthood as St. Paul argued against that of the Jews. — Ileb. x. 

*• The law having a shadow of the good things to come, not the very imaga 
of the things, by the self-same sacrifices, which they offer continually every 
year, can never make the comers thereunto perfect. Because the ^<">''shippera 
oiine cleansed should have no conscience of sin any longer. But in them 
there is made a commemoration of sins every year ; for it is impossible LUfit 
with the blood of oxen and goats sin should be taken away." 

Again, 

"And every priest, indeed, standeth daily ministering and often ofler* 
mg the same sacrifices wiiich can never take away sins; but this man 
offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth at the right hand of God, from 
hcn'^eforth expecting until his enemies be made his footstool, for by one obla" 
t^<ni he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. And the Holy Ghost 
als ^ doth testify this to us, for after that he said, ' this is the Testament which 
I v» ll make unto them after those days, saith the Lord, I will give my laws 
lu tjeir hearts, and on their minds will I write them, and their sins and ini- 
quitic^s I will remember no more. Now, when there is a remission of these, 
there is no more an oblation for sin." 

In the same manner I argue, that the daring repetition of the 
sacrifice of Christ implies, that the great atonement on the cross 
was not all-sufiicierit — this is an important subject. St. Paul 
plainly observes, that in the repetition of the Jewish sacrifices 
there was a public acknowledgment made that sin remaic^d 
unpardoned. The Jewish priests offered often the same sacri 
fices, which can never take away sin. The Roman Cathoii''. 
priesthood, in the daring attempt to offer a sacrifice, first pro- 
claim the sacrifice of Christ as insufficient ; and secondly* 
acknowledge their own as insufficient, by repeating it Mark 
the contrast — 

"The Priest stood daily ministering, and often offering the same sacrificfc."". 
•A'hich can never take away sin : but this man offering one sacrifice for sins 
for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, from henceforth expecting, until h'9 
enemies be made his footstool." v 

Why does the Saviour not repeat his sacrifice? Because *'b^ 
ONE oljlation he h^'^h perfected for ever them that are sanctified." 
Wherefore, after the announcement of the new covenant the 
Apostle adds : 

"Where there is a remission of these, THERE IS NO MORt AN 
OBLATION FOR SIN." 

The Church of Rome must hold that the remission is either 
perfect or imperfect. The latter I bring in direct oppositioo to 
the sacred scriptures, 

*' Their sins and iniquities I will remember no norej*^ 

Again, it is written, 

"Nor yet that he should offer himself o/^en, as the high prieit entereth mio 
Ihe holieal every year with the blood of others j for then he ought to iiafi 



252 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

sufiered often from the beginning of the world ; but now once at the en4 
of ages, he hath appeared for the destruction of sin by the sacrifice of himself j 
and as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after that the judgment, sa 
also Christ was offered once to exhaust the sins of many." — (Heb. ix, 24.) 

There are other passages to the same effect, which show that 
there is but one priest, Christ Jesus, God over all, blessed for 
ever. Therefore they who pretend to offer sacrifice, intrudtJ 
upon his office, and attempt to rob him of his priesthood. Buf. 
he remains eternally and immutably the great High Priest of hu 
neople. 



Sixth Day — Wednesday, April 25, 



SUBJECT. — " The Protestant Churches do not profess that 
Unity which forms the Distinctive Mark of the True Church 
of Christ:' 

Admiral Oliver and Thomas Wyse, Esq., in the Chair. 

Mr. Maguire rose, and called upon Mr. Pope, for proofs of 
the existence of that unity in the Protestant churches, which 
forms the distinctive mark of the true church of Christ. 

Mr. Pope rose, and said — Gentlemen, I shall preface my 
observations this day, with the following remarks : If I yester 
day spoke in a manner apparently bordering upon warmth, I beg 
to assuife you, that it arose from excessive bodily exhaustion, 
which obliged me, in order to give utterance to my thoughts, 
unduly to strain and exert my physical powers. 

Mr. Maguire has called upon me for proofs of that unity 
which he asserts to be a distinctive mark of the true church. I 
admit that no single Protestant communion constitutes of itself 
the church of Christ, but that the members of the Saviour's 
mystical body are scattered through the various communities ol 
professing Christians. This, my opinion of the meaning of " tho 
the church of Christ,'' coincides with authorities which my friend 
tsteems. St. Augustin says of the church, 

"That house consists in vessels of gold and silve! in precious stones, and 
mcorruptible wood ; and it is to that St. Paul says, ' bear with one another in 
'ove, keeping the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace;' and again, *the 
teu nle of God is holy, which temple ye are.' It consists in the good, in the 
fnthjuljin the holy servants of God spread every iv her e, joined together in a 
Bpiritual unity by the communion of the same sacraments, whether they know 
one another by sight or whether they do not But as for the others, they ar« 
•0 in the house as not at all to belong to the structure of the house, and thef 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 2fyd 

\ie not in that society that is faithful in peace and righteousness. Thty are 
ha chaff amid the good corn ; and we cannot deny that they are in the hiiiise, 
iince the Apostle says, 'that there are in the house not only vessels of gold 
and silver, but vessels also of wood and earth — but one to honor, the othi^r to 
dishonor." — August, de Baptis. Contra. Da lat. lib. vii, cap. 51. 

You have already perceived that the quotations which I brought 
forward on tie first day of the meeting, coincide with this view 
of toe word Church. Clemens of Alexandria ssys ; 

"The ancient Catholic church is but one only, whic'i assembles ni th« 
unity of one only faith, by the will of one only God, and the ministry of 'ne 
only Lord — all those who are before obtained, that is to say, whom God hag 
predestinated to be just, having known them before the foundation ol the 
world." — Clem. Alex. Strom, lib. vii. 

Origen says, in explaining these words, " Thou art Peter, and 
upon this rock will I build my church." — 

"The church consists of all those who are perfect, and are full of those 
words, thoughts, and actions which lead to blessedness." 

In Matt, xvi, St. Ambrose says, 

"God called his tabernacle Bethlehem, because the church of the righteous 
is his tabernacle ; and there is a mystery in it ; for Bethlehem is situated 
upon the sea of Gallilee, on the east side, which signifies to us that every soul 
that is worthy to be called the temple of God, or the church, may be built 
upon the waves of this world, but can never be drowned ; it may be encoun- 
tered, but can never be overthrown, because it depresses and calms the wild 
impetuousness of sufferings. It looks upon the shipwrecks of others, whilo 
Itself is safe from danger, always ready to receive the illumination of Jesua 
Christ, and to rejoice under his rays." — De Abrah. Patr. Lib. 1, 2. cap. 3. 

And further, elsewhere, he says expressly : 

" That as the saints are the members of Jesus Christ, so the wicked art 
the members of the devil." — In Psalm xxxv. 

St. Jerome says : 

" The church, which is the assembly of all the saints, is called in the scripture 
the pillar and ground of truth, because she has in Jesus Christ an eternal 
finnne&i." — In. Job cap. xxvi. 

Again, in the exposition of the Canticles, he says : 

** That tht church is the assembly of all the saints, and that she is brought in 
Ipeaking bi the Canticles, as if all the saints were but one person." — Cant 
aam, 1. 

And even the author of the Commentary on th3 'Psalms^ 
ascribed to St. Jerome, explaining these words of the prophet, 
»*I will drive away from the city of the Lord all workers of 
iniquity,'' says : 

" The city of the Lord is the church of the saints, the congregation of thi 
^^."— In Paal. ci. 

Tou will perceive from the quotations, whether Mr. Maguire'a 
new of tie word "church" coincides with that entertained bf 
Christian intiqufty. 

22 



254 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

Permit me to observe, that unity, abstractedly considered, is 
not a distinctive feature of the church of Christ. There may be 
unity in error, as well as unity in truth. The unity which is to 
distinguish the church of Christ, consists in holding the essen- 
tials of sound doctrine. In order to explain my meaning, permit 
me to read part of the 2d psalm : 

"Tho kings of the earth stood up, and the princes met together against 
the Loid, and against his Christ." — v. 2. 

Her 3 we read of unity; but need I say, that it was unity 
founded on error. If mere unity be the essential characteristic 
of the true church, the Jewish church will boast that it possesses 
this mark : she will say, ' Christians are divided into many sects 
and parties : there is the church of Rome, with her Dominicans 
and Franciscans, her Jesuits and Jansenists ; there are the 
Protestant communions, differing on points of external disci- 
pline — the Episcopahans, Presbyterians, Independents, and 
Baptists. Christians cannot, therefore, constitute the true church. 
We are united ; hence we are the true church.' Again : the 
Mahomedan, looking at those who possess the sacred scriptures, 
perceives that the Jews receive but a portion of them, and that 
Christians receive the New Testament in addition, and that both 
differ on various points ; he will conclude, that, if unity be a 
mark of the true church, the Jews and Christians cannot con- 
stitute it : " my church,'' he will say, " is united, therefore it is 
the true church." Again : may not the Hindoo, on this princi 
pie, when he sees the Jews receiving only the Old Testament, 
the Christians both Testaments, and the Mahomedan, though 
acknowledging Christ to be a prophet sent by heaven, denying 
his divinity — declare, " if unity be the mark of the true church, 
their's is not the true church, but mine is." The Infidel, too, 
may congratulate himself, when he perceives that those who 
profess to believe in revealed religion differ so widely. Mav 
he not say, "if unity be a mark of the true church, believeis in 
what they call a revelation do not possess that mark ; therefore 
they are not the true church; but we are united : therefore we 
are the true church." And lastly, the Atheist may step forward 
and observe, *here are Jews, Christians, Mahomedans, Hindoos, 
and Infidels, all professing to believe in a preternatural pow er, 
and yet widely differing from each other : if unity, therefore, be 
an essential mark of the true church, the Atheistical church ia 
ihat church." 

lou perceive, that mere unity is not the distinctive mark of 
the true church ; but unity in sound doctrine. Here the whoit 
argument turns ; and I boldly assert, that whatever unity is tc 
be found in the church of Rome, is a unity, not of sound doc 
Irine, but of erroneous doctrini s. 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 265 

Hear the Fathers upon this point, that real unity consists iq 
lound doctrine : 

*' They da not," says Ambrose, ** possess the inheritance of Peter, who di 
not hold the faith of Peter."— De P^nit. cap. 6. 

Tertullian observes, 

"True unity is the consanguinity of faith and doctrine." — De Praescript 
adv. Hajr. cap. 33. 

Mr. Maguire asserted, that the church of Rome did differ upon 
matters not essential, but that its unity consisted in essential 
doctrines. — Now I think essential and fundamental doctrines are 
synt>nymous terms. What is the opinion of Delahogue upon this 
distiiiotion between fundamental and non-fundamental articles 1 

"Jam manifestum est distinctionem articulorum fundamentaUum et nor 
fundainentalium merum esse commentum, scripturis evidentur repugnans, 
toti traditioni ignotum, et in desperatae causae praesidium a Jurioeo exc<^gita- 
tum."— P. 16. 

" It is now manifest, tliat the distinction between fundamental and non- 
fundamental articles is a mere comment, evidently opposed to scripture, 
unknown to tradition altogether, and invented by Juriaeus, as the last re- 
source of a desperate cause." 

I wonder whether Mr. Maguire is at unity with Delahogue on 
this subject; and we know that Delahogue is the class-book of 
Maynooth. We assert, as a positive matter of fact, that all the 
great Protestant communions in their published confessions, are 
agreed on the essential truths of the Christian system. First, 
as to the head of the church — they hold that Christ is head over 
all things to his church, God over all, blessed for ever. They 
are agreed upon the standard of faith — the Bible, and the Biblo 
alone, is the religion of Protestants. 

I hold in my hand a book entitled " Corpus et Suntagma 
' Jonfessionum," &c. A Body and Collation of the Confessions 
if Faith, which were authenticated, and edited in the name of 
the Churches in different kingdoms and nations, published in 
the most famous convention, and approved of by public autho- 
rity," &c. 1512. 

Any gentleman who pleases may examine the work ; he shall 
%ave it for the purpose. From it he will discover, that the great 
Protestant communions coincide on the canon of scripture, in 
their views of tne guilt and natural depravity of man, and on 
that great fundamental truth, that the sinner is justified by faith 
only, in the atonement of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, — 
that they harmonize on the doctrine of the necessity of a change 
of heart, ere the soul can be admitted into the kingdom of 
glory — that they iccord in the scriptural truth, that the faith of 
the gospel opens the affections, purifies the inmost recesses of 
the soul, emancipates the believer from the overwhelming influ* 
•nee of the world, binds him by the stroi^est moral obUgation»— 



256 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

in a word, consecrates him to be a vessel meet for his mastei^i 
use. These are the great essential truths on which all lea. 
Protestants agree. In support of these fundamental tenets^, I 
appeal to that blessed volume in which, to use the words o 
Beiiarmine, 

" All things necessary for all are written by the Apostles." 
" Dice ilia omnia scripta esse ab Apostolis quae sunt omnibua necessariaf 
&- " — De Verho non Scripto, Lib. iv, c, 11. 

To the Apostolic records I appeal, in support of these doc- 
tnr^es ; and to the printed confessions of faith, in demonstiation 
lha\ on essential doctrines Protestant communions are found to 
accord. Having made these few observations on the unity 
subsisting between the Protestant communions, I throw back 
apon my friend the charge of want of unity in his own church. 
I assert that his church has not unity in reference to the standard 
of faith, in reference to doctrine, and various other points — to 
which I shall presently take the liberty of calling your attention. 

My friend will tell you, doubtless, that his church possesses 
one head, as the source and centre of unity — that the Pope, as 
successor to St. Peter, is supreme. But it will devolve on him 
to prove, that Peter was the supreme Apostle, and that the Popes 
are his successors. I shall assign my reasons for the opinion, 
that Peter did not possess juiisdiction over the other Apostles. 
Peter was speciall/ the Apostle of the Jews, and was nox 
appointed to watch over the Gentile church. Paul was the 
Apostle of the Gentiles, and if any on that ground could lay 
claim to supremacy, the Apostle Paul was the individual. Mark 
the absurdity into which this doctrine of Peter's supremacy would 
lead us. St. John survived Peter about twenty years. If thi8 
prerogative therefore belongs to the bishop of Rome, we should 
nave an uninspired man, whether Linus, or Clement exercising 
jurisdiction over an inspired Apostle ? 

The Apostles, permit me to add, never recognized Peter as 
supreme. At the last supper we find them disputing which oi 
them should be the greatest. Had they conceived that the 
Saviour, in the passage, " Thou art Peter," &c, had conferred 
superiority upon him, is it likely that such a dispute could have 
arisen amongst them ? xAnd if the Saviour had conferred any 
8U( h authority upon Peter, would he not have referred the 
Apostles to his previous decision, in order to terminate the dis- 
putation: but he simply inculcates upon them a lesson of humiUty 
(Luke, xxii, 24.) When the Apostles had found that Samaria 
had received the Word of God, " they sent unto them Peter and 
John." — (Acts, viii, 14.) The inferior confessedly is sent by 
Ihe superior, and therefore neither Peter nor John were ubova 
the other Apostles At the first assembly in Jerusalem, though 



THE PROTESTANT CHl^RCHES 25? 

Peter and Janies both delivered their o[)inions, yet the opi now 
of James, and not that of Peter, was received by the assembly. 
(Acts, XV, IJ ) And in the letter which was subsequently 
written, ther^ is no mention whatever made of Peter. The 
decree thus commences, 

'Thf Apostles and ancient or "iren, to the brethren of the Gentiles."— 
1 33. 

Tho A[ 3stle Paal talks ol ischisms — 

"Eve y c ;e of you saith, I am of Paul, I of Apollos, and I of Cephas.'*— 
i Cor i 12. 

True, you will say, it was wrong to assert that they were 
under Paul or Apollos : but, I ask, what think you of " I am of 
Cephas or Peter?" / ask^ if Peter was the supremt apostle^ 
would Paul hai'c condemned the Corinthian Christians for putting 
themselves under the standard of the supreme head? Further — if 
to have one earthly head be the essential characteristic of the 
true Church, ihe C_.urch in the primitive times did not possess 
this centre of unity. No bishop assumed the title of supreme 
until Boniface III, in tho year 606. Na^ — this centre of unity 
has been the pregnant source of divisions in the church of Rome. 
We read of more than twenty schisms arising from the Popedom. 
At one period we find Pope fulminating agamst Pope for a seri 
of years. Stephen VI, abrogated the decrees of Pope Formosua 
his predecessor, drew his body out of his sepulchre, cut off hia 
fingers, because they had been used in ordination, and threw 
them into the Tiber ; alleging as a reason, that he obtained 
Peter's chair by perjury. Romanus, the next Pope, abrogated 
all the decrees of his predecessor, Stephen ; and as Platina 
observes, this quarrel had such an injurious influence, that every 
following Pope infringed, or wholly abrogated the acts of the 
foregoing. 

Again — the church of Rome is split on the subject of the tem- 
poral power of the Popes, also on infallibility. What shall we 
say of the heretical heads which have presided over the church 
of Rome. Pope Honorius was deposed for heresy by a general 
council. It is, indeed, a daring assumption on the part of man, 
to take on him an office which is the exclusive prerogative of tha 
Lord Jesus Christ, which no earthly being, however extensive 
his information, correct his principles, and mighty his intellectual 
powers may be, should dare to assume, an office which no combi* 
nation of talents, howev-er exalted, could qualify him to discharge. 

Mr. Maguire. — You have heard, gr^ntlemen, perhaps the 
best defence which could possibly bv, sei up for tne Protestant 
churches As to unity, I contend, that it is required by scrip* 
lure as a mark of that peace which Christ bequer^L^d to hia 

22* 



858 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

followers — " My peace I leave with you — my peace I give 
you," — and as a token of that holiness which our Lord intended 
should, intil the consummation of ages, characterize the true 
church upon earth. You have heard the most ingenious defence 
which could be offered for the absence of all unity ; and you 
cannot have failed to observe that Mr. Pope has employed his 
usual tact on this occasion. I had put him on his defence as 
'l a certain point of doctrine. I had left the ground clear for 
uim. But, instead of confining himself to the maintenance of 
his own principles on this particular point, and to an anticipation 
of my objections, he turns upon me, and, as has been his inva- 
riable practice, puts me upon my defence. In that respect Mr 
Pope deserves much credit for his ingenuity. I had hoped thai 
the discussion would terminate this day with good humour and 
^ood feeling. Some expressions dropped from my opponent 
yesterday, which might as well have been spared. In stating 
ny arguments as to Mr. Pope's principles, I confined myself to 
rhe proof their inconsistency with the moral precepts of the 
jyospel. Though I took care that my arguments as to morality 
should be confined to the principles, and not addressed to the 
ir^dividual, my opponent has in return made personal allusions 
to my moral character. This I will say, that the comparison 
which my friend, Mr. Pope, has drawn between his moral char- 
acter and mine, was not provoked by any observation that had 
fallen from me. I would not, however, shrink from such an 
investigation at any time, that it might be shown to be calculated 
to serve any good or useful purpose. I have endeavoured 
through life, though, indeed, I cannot lay claim to the title of 
*' saint," to square my conduct agreeably to the maxims of the 
gospel ; and I believe I may say, that in the habits of social 
intercourse, neither my Protestant nor Catholic friends have had 
any thing to complain of on my part. Mr. Pope has told me, 
and he laid great stress on the observation, that there is no such 
expression in the New Testament as i6(^6vg^ signifying a sacr- 
Being priest. 

Mr. Pope. — What I said was, that it remains to be proved 
Ihat the word te^euj is employed in the New Testament, to da- 
gignate a minister of the New Testament. 

Mr. Maguire. — I beg to refer you to the fifth chapter of the 
Apocalypse of St. John. Here the Apostle describes a book 
which he saw lying at the right hand of him, who sat upon the 
throne, sealed with seven seals — he also saw a mighty un^il 
4rho exclaimed with a loud voice — 

** Who is worthy lo open the book and to break the seals 7" 



THE PROTEiTANT CHURCHES. 259 

And no person could be found either in heaven or on earth, 
b. under (he earth, to open the book, or look into it. The 
e>,&ngelist then proceeds to say that he wept much, because 
there was none fuuiid worthy, cither to open the book, or to 
look at it. And one of the elders said to him — 

" Weep not, behold the Lion of the tribe of Juda and thi root of David^ 
pi^vaileth to opf n the book and to break its seven seals." 

In the 8ch verse, he says — that when the Lion of the tribe of 
J jda, (niear^ng Christ) had opened the book, the four animals 
an«l the four and twenty elders prostrated themselves before the 
Lamb, saying — 

"Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive the book, and to break its seals, 
because ihou hast been slain, and hast redeemed us unto God in thy blood, 
of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation, and thou hast made us a 
kingdom and priests and we will reign upon the earth." 

I now wish it to be remarked, that the persons who are pre- 
viously styled IJQea^vTFQoi^ — Presbyters — are in the tenth verse 
styled Fe^ei, translated by St. Jerome, Sacerdotes — the Vulgate 
translation of the tenth verse is — " Et fecisti nos Deo nostro 
regnum et Sacerdotes ; et regnabimus super terram." Here the 
four and twenty elders, who are called in the fourth verse of the 
forf^going chapter, IJQea^vreQoi,, and who are said to have been 
( lothed in white vestments, give glory to God that he had made 
them priests, as St. Jerome renders it, and that they will reign 
/jpon the earth. Now if these had not been priests of the ne\^' 
law how could they say, " we will reign upon the earth." But, 
&s priests of the new law, the expression was reasonable, as they 
had ruled and are still ruling by their representative successors, 
it is admitted that iBQsvg is applied to them, and I have shown 
that they must have been priests of the new law. 

Mr. Pope laid much stress on the fact that our Lord spoke to 
his disciples at Capernaum in the Syriac language, and that, as 
there is no word in that language tantamount to " represent," 
the verb " is" is employed to convey the meaning of represent. 
I beg to remind my friend Mr. Pope, that he has fallen into a 
notable error on this point — he should have borne in his recol- 
lection, that although our Lord (who never wrote any) then 
rpoke in the Syriac tongue, the evangelist wrote his gospel in the 
Greek language, which is not deficient in a word signifying " io 
reprefiefit.^^ Whatever question then may be raised relative to 
ihe language in which our Saviour spoke, his words have been 
transcribed into Greek, and I suppose Mr. Pope will not accuse 
the evangelists of misrepresenting Jesus Christ. Mr. Pope also 
formed an argument touching the ancient liturgies in the Syriac 
tongue. What is the fact ? Every day in the year at St. Peter's 
in Rome, mass is ceiebjated in the Syriac, but the words of th« 



MK) THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

institution of the sacrament are retained in the original Gr<etk— 
such was their great respect and awfui veneration for the words 
of the institution. 

I shall endeavour to follow Mr. Pope through the varioua 
observations in which he has indulged. I have taken my proof* 
from scripture and from the Fathers of the third, fourth, and fifth 
agef of the church. I have sustained no doctrine which I have 
not clearly proved to be founded on scripture. You will not 
fail to remark that Mr. Pope has appealed but to very few texts, 
and whether those which he has quoted, be equally strong and 
clear, and equally apphcable as those adduced by me, I shall 
leave to you and to the world to decide. In the tenth chaptei 
of St. John, verse 16, we read : 

"And other sheep i have that are not of this fold : them also I must bring, 
and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be made onefold and one shepherd.^ 

It is plain that the idea of one fold signifies that all the sheep 
are to be kept under the control of one shepherd. Perhaps, 
this may not be the interpretation put upon the passage by Mr. 
Pope's private judgment, but it is in my opinion the clear and 
obvious meaning of the text. In the seventeenth chapter of 
ohn, verse 20, 21, our Saviour says: 

" And not for them only do I pray, but for those also who through their 
word shall believe in me ; that they may all be one as thou, Father, in me, 
and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe 
that thou hast sent me." 

If the unity which Christ conferred upon his church be com- 
pared, as it here is, by Christ himself, to the unity which exista 
between him and his heavenly Father, it evidently follows that 
such unity can scarcely be exceeded. In Romans, xv, 5 and ^i, 
we read, 

"Now the God of patience and of comfort grant you to be of one mind, one 
towards another, according to Jesus Christ ; that with one mind, and with 
tne mouth, you may glorify God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." 

In the same chapter, verses 16 and 17, we read, 

"Now 1 beseech you, brethren, to mark them who cause dissensions^ and 
offend contrary to the doctrine which you have learned ; and to avoid them,* 

In the 1st Corinthians, 1st chapter, 10th vorse, we read, 

"Now I beseech, you, brethren, that you all speak the same thing, ani 
that there be no schisms among you; but tha* vou be perfect in the Sisnu 
mind, and in the same judgments." 

You will observe that the Apostle makes no distinctidn be- 
tween schism in doctrine, and schisms in discipline. 

"Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace — one body, 
and one spirit; as vou are all called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, 
one faith, one bapUsm. One God, and Father of all, who is above all, an4 
Ihrough all, and in us all." — Ephes. iv, 31, 5, 6. 



THE PR)TESTANT CHURCHES. 261 

Let U8, therefore, as many as are perfect, be thus minded ; neverthelesi 
•^Hereunto we are already arrived, thet we be of the same mind ; let us alao 
eontinue in the same rule." — Phil, iii, 15, 16. 

Mark the following words of the great Apostle of the Gen 
tiles, in his epistle to Titus iii, 10- — 

"A man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition, avoid 
knowing that he, that is such an one, is subverted and sinneth, being coiv 
iemned by his private judgment — propria judicio condemnatus.^^ 

" But if any man seem to be contentiousy we have no such custom, nor the 
church of God." — 1 Cor. xi, 15. 

Again, 

"Follow peace with all men, without which no man shall see God." 
Heb. xii, 14. 

I have now laid before you direct and positive texts of scrip- 
ture on the subject of unity, and I shall leave them for the pro- 
sent, without any commentary, to make the due impression upon 
the judgments of the candid and the impartial. 

I shall now proceed to the testimonies of the Fathers on the 
subject. I shall commence at the earliest era, with Saints 
Ignatius and Clement ; the latter was'^a disciple and coadjutor 
of the Apostles, as he is styled by St. Paul to the Phillippians 
(iv, 3.) Ignatius, whom I shall first quote, was the second 
bishop of Antioch, after St. Peter, and governed that church for 
forty years, and died a martyr, under the emperor Trajan. St. 
Ignatius, in his epistle to the people of Magnesia, having recom- 
mended them to preserve concord among themselves, and to 
submit to their superiors, as he does indeed in all his epistles, 
proceeds to say, 

*' Avoiding heterodox opinions and useless fables, labour to be strengthened 
^ the doctrines of the Lord and of the Apostles, in order that you may pros- 
*M5r in all things, in body and spirit, in faith and charity ; together with your 
. JspectaMe bishops, the united college of priests, and the holy deacons. Be 
submissive to the bishops and to one another, as Jesus Christ, according to the 
flesh, was to his Father, and the Apostles to Christ, and to the Father, and 
the Holy Spirit; that your union be in body and spirit." — Ep, ad Magnes, inter 
P. P, Apost. tome ii, p. 21. Ed, Amsteladami, 1724. 

Again, 

**! conjure you to use only Christian food, and to refrain ^rom foreign xceea, 
which is heresy. Guard yourselves from such, which you will do, if you b€ 
jK)t puffed up, but remain inseparably united to Jesus Christ, and your bishop, 
and the ordinances of the Apostles. He who is within the altar is clean ; but 
be who is without J that is teithout the bishop^ and the priests, and the deacons, 
18 njt cUaa."— (£/). ad Trallianos, p. 23.) 

Again, 

" He who corrupts the faith of Grod, for which Christ suffered, the sann 
Deing defiled, shall go into unquenchable firr, as shall he that heareth him." — 
Ep, ad Ephes. p. 15. 

"As children of light and truth avoid tl e divisions of unity, and the ba^ 
doctrines of heretics. Where the shejiherd is, do you, like slieep folloKr.''— 
1^. a* PAi/o^. p. SI. 



862 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

St. Clement, the disciple of St. John the evangelist, and coati* 
jutor of the Apostle Paul, in his first epistle to the Corinthians^ 
cliapter 46, (Inter P. P. Apostolicos, tome i, page 174, Edit. 
Amsteloedami, 1724,) has the following pertinent remarks : 

"Why are these contentions and schisms among you? Have we not one 
God and one Christ? And one spirit and one calling in Christ? Why do 
we di\ide and sever the members of Christ, and raise sedition among the 
body ? Your schisms pervert many ; it has cast many into dejection ; msny 
it has caused to doubt, and afflicted us all. Notwithstanding this, you 
desist not" 

St. Clement, you will also observe, makes no distinction what- 
ever between schism in doctrine and in discipline, but bestowa 
indiscriminate reprobation upon schism of every description. 

Hegisippus, who was a native of Palestine, and belonged to 
the church of Jerusalem, and resided near twenty years at Rome 
and of whom St. Jerome says, that he lived near to the Apos* 
tolic times, and compiled a history in five books, of all that had 
passed from the death of our Lord to his own days, (a few frag, 
ments of which are preserved by Eusebius,) and who died ahou? 
the year 180, has the following passages, as preserved by Euse- 
bius in his History, (I shall give the words of the historian him- 
self, as they are related of Hegisippus) — 

" In the books which have come down to us, Hegisippus relates of hnnself, 
that as he went to Rome, he visited many bishops, and heard from all, one 
and the same doctrine. They called the church (says he) a virgin, because 
as yet she had not been corrupted by vain opinions. From the heretics who 
then rose, came false Christs, false prophets, and false Apostles; and these, 
introducing counterfeit doctrine against God, and against his Christ, severed 
the unity of the church." — Apua Euseb. Hist. Eccies. lib. iv, c. 22, p. 161. 
Ed. Cantabrig. 1720. 

IrensBus, 

" The church extended to the boundaries of the earth, received her faith 
from the Apostles, and their disciples. Having received it; she carefuWy 
retains it, as if dwelling in one house, as possessing one love, and one heart . 
the same faith she delivers and teaches with one accord, and as if gifted with 
one tongue. For though in the world there be various modes of speech, the 
tradition of doctrine is one and the same. In the churches of Germany, in 
those of Spain and Gaul, in those of the East, of Egypt, and of Africa, and 
m the middle regions, is the same belief — the same teaching. For as the 
world is enlightened by one sun, so does the preacliing of one faith enlighten 
all men that are willing to come to the knoioledge of truth. Nor among the 
pastors of the church does he that is eloquent deliver other doctrine, for no 
one is above his master — nor he that is weak in speech, diminish the truths 
of fadition. Faith being one, cannot be effected by the power or the want 
•/ Jtterance." — Adv. Heres. lib. i, c. ii, iii, p. 45, 46. Ed. Oxon. 1702. 

And, 

"God placed in his church, Apostles, prophets, doctors : and the whole 
deration of the spirit of which they do not partake^ who are not united to the 
church; hu"^ by their own bad designs and actions, they deprive themselvet 
rf life. Fyf where the church is, there is the Spirit of God ; and where thii 
Spirit is, there is the church and all grace ; the Spirit is truth." — Ibidem, lib 
«9 c 40^ p. 266. See also Lib. iv, c. 62. 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES 26i 

In the days of Irenaeus commenced the Quarto Deciman dis- 
pute. The question regarded the time of celebrating the feast 
of Easter, and was finally decided against the churches of Asia 
Minor, by the council of Nice. This serious controversy ex- 
torted from the holy Father the pathetic and anxious language 
quoted above, by which he besought them to maintain not only 
unity in faith, but unity of discipline also. It further proves ihe 
solicitude of the church to maintain uniformity of practice. 

Tertullian, De Prescrip. c. xx, p. 234. — 

" The Apostles having received the promised assistance ot the Holy Spiril 
first pleached the faith in Judaea, and planted churches, whence, going into 
the whole world, they proclaimed the same doctrine to the nations, and foun- 
ded churches. Therefore these, so many and so great churches, are one from 
that one of the Apostles, from which are all. And thus all are ApostoJic, 
while all maintain the same unity." 

And, 

** There is one faith to the Apostles and to us— one God — one Christ — one 
hope — the same sacraments. Let me say it in one word, we are all onr. 
church. Whatever belongs to any among us, is also our own. Hoc nostrum 
est quodcumque nostrorum est." — De Virg. Veland, p. 309. 

St. Clement of Alexandria, lib. vii, Stromat. No. 17, p. 899, 

900— 

" From what has been said, I thmk it manifest that there is only one true 
church, which is alone ancient, to which all the just properly belong. This 
church, which is one, is formed into one nature, which unity it is the endea- 
voui of heretics to sever into many. Therefore we say, that the ancient 
and Catholic church alone is one in essence, in opinion, in origin, and in 
excellence, one in faith — Of this church, the eminence as well as the principle 
of its construction, arises from unity ; by this surpassing all other things, 
and knowing nothing like or equal to itself. The doctrine of all the ApoS' 
ties was one, aa was one all that they delivered." 

He elsewhere defines the church to be — 

" A people collected into one faith from the Jews and Gentiles." 

And afterwards adds — 
" Thus they both arrive at the unity of faith." — Ibid, vi, p. 736, 793. 

Hear the emphatic Origen — 

" As they shall not possess the kingdom of God, who have been aenled bjp 
fornication, other impurities, and the worship of idols, so neither shall heretics." 
Hom. in ep, ad Tit. apud Pamphylum Apol. t. i, p. 481. Edit, GeLebradl 

" Should any one be found not hastening, not betaking himself to the walled 
cities, that is, shall not have entered into the churches of God, but hava 
remain 3d without, he stall perish in the hands of the enemy." — Horn, v, ia 
Jerem. t. iii, p. 161. Edit. Paris, 1733. 

" Let no one persuade, no one deceive himself ; out of this house, that is. 
out of the church, is no salvation. He that shall g* out, becomes guilty oi 
his own death." — Hom. iv, in Josue, t. ii, p. 404. 

St Cyprian, the Martyr, who wrote an elaborate work, pro- 
fessedly upon the absolute liecessity of Ecclesiastical Unity, a« 
may be seen in his book, joflmm, De Unitate Ecclesiae, p lOB 
Edit. OxoQ. 1682. et alibi- bus expresses himself: 



264 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

" The church is one, widely extended by its fecundity ; as theie a^-e man) 
rays of light, but one sun ; many branches of a tree, but one root deepljf 
fixed ; many streams of water, bul one source. Take a ray from the sun ; 
the unity of light allows not divi&ion. Break a branch from the tree, tfw 
branch cannot germinate. Cut off the stream from its source, the stream dries 
up. So the church sends forth her rays over the whole earth ; yet is the light 
one, and its unity is undivided. 

*' He that does not hold this unity of the church, can he think that netio.ds 
the faith ? tie that opposes and withstands the church, can he trust thai he 
is in the church ? When the blessed Paul teiiches the same thing, and shows 
the sacred character of unity, saying, (Ephes. iv, 4, 5, 6,) atie body and 07ie 
Hfjnt U &c ; which unity, it ya our duty firmly to hold and to vindicate." 

** Whosoever is separated from the church, is joined to an adulteress: is 
cut off from the promises of the church. Who deserts the church of Christ, 
obtains not the rewards of Christ. He is an alien ; he is profane ; he is an 
enemy. He cannot have God for a Father, who has not the church for his 
mother. If excluded from the ark of Noah, any one might have escaped ; so 
may he, if out of the church. The Lord admonishes, and says, * he that is 
not ivith me is against mc." — (Mark, xii, 30.) Who violates the peace of 
Christ and concord, is against him." 

*' The Lord says, * I and the Father are ontj' (John, x, 30.) — And again, ot 
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, it is written, * and these three are one^'' 
(John, i, 7.) He who holds not this unity, holds not the law of God, noi 
the faith of the Father and the Son, nor the truth that is unto salvation."— 
Ibid. p. 109. 

And after proving that by the seamless garment of Christ the 
unity of the church was represented, the holy Martyr adds — 

" Who is so wicked and perfidious, who so transported by the rage of 
iiscord, as to think, that the unity of God, the vesture of the Lord, the church 
of Christ may be severed ? Christ tells us in his gospel, Hhere shall be one 
dock, and one shepherd.' — (John, x, 16.) Does any one then imagine, that 
jn the same place may be many shepherds and many flocks ? 

" The Apostle also, urging the same unity, entreats and admonishes, say- 
ing — * J^ow I beseech you brethren^ by the name of the Lord Jesus Chnstj thai 
you all speak the same things and that there be no schism among you.^ — Ibid* 
^110. 

*' God is one, and Christ is one, and his Church is one, and faith is one, and 
tiis people connected by one solid bond, is one. Unity cannot be severed nor 
the one body by laceration be divided. Whatever is separated from the stock 
cannot live ; cannot breathe apart; it loses the substance of life." — Ibid. 1 19. 

Dionysius of Alexandria, who was a catechist of the church 
*)f Alexandria, as St. Clement had been, and succeeded to that 
see about the year 247, and is" much spoken of by the early 
ecclesiastical writers, as highly illustrious for the learning and 
Eeal with vhich he defended the Catholic cause, and who died 
ftbout the year 264, thus addresses the schismatic Novatian : 

" You ought rather to have suffered all things than to have raised a schism 
m the church. To die in defence of its unity would be as glorious as laying 
down our Ufe rather than sacrifice to idols ; and in my opinion more gloiious ; 
because here the safety of the whole church is consulted. If you bring youi 
brethren to union, this will overbalance your fault, which will be forgotten 
aiid you will receive commendation. If you cannot gain others, at least saT« 
your Gwn souls.'' — Ap^ Busebii Hist Eccles. lib. vi, c. 46, 318, Eldrt C«» 
Ub. K20. 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES 265 

Lactaiitius, who was called the Christian Cicero, in the 4tli 
Book of his Institutions, c. xxx, p. 232, Cambridge Editioni 
1685, has the following nervous language on the subject • 

" The Catholic church alone retains the true worship. This is the source 
cf truth, this is the dwelling of faith, this is the temple of God, into which 
he that enters not, r.nd from which he that goes out, forfeits the hope of life, 
and of eternal salvation." 

Alexander, patriarch of Alexandria, who vigorously opposed 
the heresy of Arius from its very birth, and excommunicated 
its author and abettors, and who assisted at the first council of 
Nice, anno 325, writes to his " fellow-ministers of the Catholic 
church," as follows : 

" As the body of the Catholic churcn is one, and the scriptures comnnand, 
that we maintain the bond of peace and concord, it is proper, that m regard 
to all things that are done amon^ us, we should condole or rejoice with one 
another."— A pud Socratem. lib. i, c. 6, p. 10. Edit. Cantab. 1720. 

And speaking of the Arians, he says : 

** That seamless garment which the murderers of Christ would not divide, 
these men (the Arians) have dared to rip asunder." — Apud Theodoret, Lib. 
i, c. 4, p. 9. Edit. Cantab. 1720. 

The council of Nice, the first general council, held in the 
year 325, three hundred and eighteen bishops present — (as is 
generally admitted) — and held at a period too, when, by the 
confession of all Protestants, the church exhibited undoubted 
proofs of primitive purity, thus declared, 

"But as to those persons who are found not to have declined to any schism, 
and to have kept themselves uncontaminated within the Catholic and Apos- 
tolic church, they have a right to ordain." — Gen. Con. t. ii, p. 250. Ed. Paris, 
1671. 

I have also Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. lib. v, c. 11, p. 212. 
Edit. Cant. 1720. St. Athanasius, whom the Protestants have 
borrowed from us, and adopted as their patron saint, and whose 
truth they so peremptorily insist upon, (I know not whether he 
be a favourite with the lay church of Mr. Pope,) thus expresses 
himself, in his epistle De Decret. Nicaen. t. i, p. 211 ; 

" The Gentiles who disagree among themselves, are deprived of the trris 
doctrine ; but the saints, and they, who are the preachers of truth, arewia.'i- 
mous, — They lived, indeed, al different times, but the object of all was tl*? 
same ; for they were the propnets of one God, and they announced, with one 
consent, the same word of truth." 

St. Basil,— 

" We indeed, ourselves, are of little value ; but, by the grace of God, w«i 
remain ever the same, unaffected by the common change of things. Our 
Delief is not one at Seleucia, and another at Constantinople ; one at Lampa»« 
chus, and another at Rome : and so different from what was in former limes, 
Dut always one and the same." — Ep, 250 ad EvcecinaSy t iii, p. ^&. Edii 
Bened . Parisiis, 1 72 1 . 

23 



il)ti *««^ *VANT OF UNITY OF 

** As many as hope in Christ, are one people, and they, who are of Chrurt 
form one church, though it may be named in many places." — Ep. 161, mI 
tdmphiL t. iii, p. 252. 

Again — Ep. 204, ad JVeocces, t. iii, p. 307. 

" It is morejust to judge of our concerns, not from this or that man, wh« 
walk not in truth, but from the number of bishops who. in all regions, aw 
united to us. Let the cities of Asia, the sound part of Egypt, and of Syria, 
be interrogated. These by letter communicate with us, and we with them. 
From these you may learn, that we are all unanimous ; all think the same 
tiling. Wherefore, he who declines our communion, may be considered by 
you, as separated from the universal church. It is better we should lose oui 
lives, and that the churches should remain unanimous, than that on account 
of our childish feuds, the faithful should be so much injured. 

St. Cyril of Jerusalem. 

"Uphold the faith, and that faith alone, which is now delivered to theci j^ 
the churchy confirmed as it is by all the scriptures." — Cat. v, ]No. 7, p. 75. 

" We declare the ways of error, that we may proceed on one royal road." — 
Cat. xvi, No. 6, p. 226. 

" As far as our time of instruction would allow, we have spoken to you o! 
that holv and Apostolic faith which was delivered to you." — Cat. xviii. Na 
7, p. 274. 

Ephrem of Edessa, 

" Blessed is the man, who has chosen the Catholic church. They shall be 
deemed deserving of punishment, who think of sowing the seeds of separa- 
tion in the breast of men. Ctuit not then the Catholic faith, nor full from it, 
snouid any question or schism arise." — In Testam. t.iii, p. 296. Edit. BossiL 

Again — Sermo 24, adv. Herer, p. 493, J. W. Bit. Quirini. 

" The assembly of the good detest those appellations, which are derived 
from men ; wherefore, the Sabellians and Arians, and sectaries, displeased 
with the names which their respective authors have given them, craftily endea- 
vour to decorate themselves with the name of our church, and to please her. 
They are aware, who they are, whom she loves, and that she rests wholly on 
Christ. Have they not read how the Apostle blamed those, who said they 
were the followers of Paul, or of Apollos, or of Cephas ? But a more bitter 
course of grief has assailed us, since some of our own standing have given 
their names to their followers. Blessed be that name wherein we were called. 
Consider, therefore, on which side is the doctrine of the Apostles. They 
gave no names ; and where it is done, there is a departure from their rule. 
On the other hand we declare, that truth will be found with those, who are 
known by the name of Christ alone." 

St. Ambrose, the meridian sun of the Latin church, comment- 
ing on the words of the apostles to the Ephesians, chap, iv, v. 4. 
" One body and one spirit, as you are called in one hope of 
your calling," says, 

" To promote peace and concord, Paul added this — that as the church if 
one body, so the people should cultivate union ; for the object of our belief u 
one, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all." 

Again, he commands unity, that, 

" As all are called to unity, we should differ in nothing. For if there ba 
one Lord, that is, one Christ; one faith and one baptism, one God and Fathei 
of all, the mind al?o should be one, aiid the heart of the people one, since all 
the things that he enumerates are examples of unity ; for they agree in all 
things." — (Comment in Cap. iv. Ep. ad Ephes. t iii* p ^3. Ed. Pari 8, 1614 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 267 

On the /leath of his brother Satyrus, having related hi« escape 
from a storm, and the desire he felt to return solemn thanks ta 
God, St. Ambrose adds : 

" When we got to land, he sent for the bishop of the place ; but aware that 
true faith alone was acceptable to heaven, he inquired of him was he in 
romrnunion with the Catholic bishops, that is with the Roman Bishops (utrum- 
nam cum Episcopis Catholicis, hoc est, cum Romana Ecclesia, Convenient?) 
For the country he knew was infected with schism. The bishop at the time 
had withdrawn himself from our communion : and though he was in banisii' 
ment for his faith, yet in schism there could be no true faith. He ha J faith 
towards God, but not towards the church, whose members he permitted to be 
torn asunder. For since Christ died for the church, and the church is the 
body of Christ, they, by whom his passion is made void, and his body is torn 
asunder, cannot hold his faith. How desirous soever therefore my brother 
might be to express publicly his gratitude, he chose to defer it ; because he 
knew that true faith was necessary for its due accomplishment." — De Ohitu 
Fratris Satyri, t. iv, p. 316. 

I have mentioned this one fact, because it shows more thai. 
any reasoning on the subject of union could do, how great was 
the horror then entertained of schism, or of departing from the 
faith or discipUne of the church. 

I have also Optatus, Jerome, Chrysostom, Augustin, Theo- 
doret, the council of Chalcedon, &c, here, and they are all 
unanimous in their interpretation of the sacred Scriptures on 
this subject, and they are equally strong in holding the absolute 
necessity of unity in the church. 

Mr. Pope. — Gentlemen, having spoken on the moral influ- 
ence of that gospel, which proclaims acceptance to the guilty 
by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, I shall not again return to the 
subject. I have been referred to the 6th chap, of the Apoca- 
lypse, in evidence that the word uqsvq is applied to the minis- 
ters of the New Testament. I reply, that the passage speaks 
of heaven, where the four-and-twenty elders are represented as 
singing to the praise of the Lamb : but it still remains for my 
friend to prove that the word legevg is applied to the ministers of 
Christ on earthy so distinguish them from the laity. I turn to the 
first chap, of the Apocalypse, and the 6th verse, and I read, 

" Who hath made us a kingdom, and priests to God and his Father." 

Here we find the Apostle, in reference to heaven, including 
laics, as well as ecclesiastics, in the general appellation of kings 
and priests. In the 1st of Peter, 2d ch. and 5th ver. believers 
on earth, generally^ are called " ^aoiXsLov leQuTsv/na ," " a royal 
priesthood :'* it being evident fiom the opening verse of the epis- 
tle, that it ii? addressed not to ministers alone, or to the learned 
exclusively, but generally to the strangers scattered through the 
countries, of which the Apostle speaks. The expression uqel^ 
lft« therefore^ bestowed on the people of God at large, and is no< 



268 THE WAi^r OF UNITY OF 

R peculiar designatioa of the ministers of the New Testament 
My friend says, that Peter calls himself a priest. I turn to the 
passage referred to, 1st of Peter, 5th chapter, and 1st verse, and 
I find the expression is " Gn/^Tr^fa/^uTF^og," "fellow-elder," not 
te^fci^^. In the Douay version, I find that there also Peter in 
the passage is called, " an ancient," not a priest : 

"Th3 ancients, therefore, that are amon^ you, I beseech, who am mys^ll 
also an ancient, and a witness of the sufferings of Chilst" 

The term le^evg is not even applied specially to the Apostles 
themselves. Mr. Maguire referred us to John : let him have the 
kindness to mention the passage to which he calls our attention, 
and you will be convinced that t^sqevg is not the term employed. 

[Mr. Maguire. — I spoke of Revelations 5th chapter, and 
10th verse.] 

Mr. Pope. — I was under the impression that you also referred 
to some other passage. But, to bring the point to an issue : I 
maintain, that the word legsvg is not applied exclusively to the 
ministers of the New Testament, or even to the Apostles them 
selves. I here assert, that it is not so applied. Christ spoke 
in Syriac ; and there being no word in the language signifying 
" to represent," he was obliged to employ the auxiliary verb. 
But the Apostle Paul wrote in Greek, which furnishes a word 
meaning " to represent ;" yet he says, in 1st Cor. 10th chapter, 

" That rock was Christ" ' rj irtrpa nv o 'Kpiaros. 
Again, he says, Galatians, 4th chap, and 24th verse, 

" The one from Mount Sinai engendering into bondage, which is Agar." 

Here the auxiliary verb is employed as denoting to represent. 

In the quotations made by Mr. Maguire throughout the 
discussion, he has taken it for granted, that the church of Rome 
is the church of Christ ; but I appeal to your judgments, whether 
he has been able to prove the assumption. I admit that unity 
should exist amongst the disciples of Christ ; but it should not 
be a mere external and superficial unity : it should be a union 
of affection and of doctrine in every essential point. This unity 
1 have shown to exist in the Protestant churches. Ijet the creeds 
of the English, Scotch, Helvetic, and other Protestant com- 
munions, be examined. As to the passage, " one fold and one 
shepherd ;'* I hold, that the Saviour spoke of Jew and Gentile 
being joined together in one church. St. Paul says, 

" He has broken down the middle wall of partition, and hath made of twain 
one new man." — Ephes. ii, 14, 15. 

When the Saviour prays that they all might be one, he speakf 
i admit, of his church : but does Mr. M&g lire mean to Bay 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 269 

Ihat the Pope is the shepherd I have shown that the Pope la 
mcompetent to discarge the duties of the office. Christ is thai 
ehepherd, as the Apostle Peter says, who calls him 

"The shepherd and bishop of the soul." — 1 Pet. ii, 25. 

Mr, Maguire refers us to the words of the Saviour's \ rayer fni 
his disciples, 

" That they may be 3ne, as thou Father art in me, and 1 in thee." 

Now I would ask, is the union existing between the Fathei 
and the Son a sensible, a tangible, a visible union ? Is it not 
evidently spiritual in its character ? A spiritual bond doea 
subsist amongst the people of God in the Protestant commu- 
nions. The supplication of our Lord and of Paul, that they ma^ 
be of " the same iiiind,'' will be more and more fulfilled in the 
real and spiritual union of the people of God. I trust, we shall 
see them in heart and hand still more cordially united together, 
evidencing that there does exist amongst them a kuidred spirit- 
ual affection, " where there is neither Jew, nor Greek, Barba- 
rian, Scythian, bond nor free, but Christ is all in all." — Coloss. 
lii, 11. These holy bonds will never be dissolved : they survive 
the stroke of death — they exist throughout eternity ; and as the 
ages of immortality shall roll along, will they be more and more 
consolidated, and more closely linked together. My friend quotes 
Romans, xvi, 17. 

" Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who make dissensions and 
offences, contrary to the doctrine which you have loarned, and to avoid them." 

Mark, it is doctrine of which he speaks — now it is in exact 
compliance with this command, that we separate from the church 
of Rome ; because she errs in doctrine, and teaches the inven- 
tions of men, instead of the commandments of God. Peihaps 
Mr. Maguire would like to hear a quotation from Augustiii, in 
illustration of this observation. Many gave up the scriptures 
in the time of persecution, and were in consequence called 
Traditors. It was urged on St. Augustin to leave the conimu- 
uion of the Traditors. St, Augustin then replies, 

*' Is it that the Traditors have instituted some new saciamerjrs, or some 
new baptism ? Is it that they have composed books to teach others to do or 
imitate the action of the Traditors, or th.it they have recommended those books 
to posterity, or that we hoM and follow that doctrine ? If they had done so, 
and suffered no person to have been in their communion, butthose who would 
read their books and approve that doctrine, I say, that they would haveEopa- 
rated themselves from the unity of the church: and if you saw me in their 
ichism, you would then have reason to say, that I were in the church of tht 
Traditors." — Augustin Contr. Crescon. lib. iii, cap. 38. 

Now the Church of Rome has introduced new sacraments 
and uncanonical books, which she has recommended to posterity 
us divine. She suffers nojie in her communion who do not hold 

23* 



270 THE WANl OF UNITY OF 

her peculiar opi lions, and therefore separates herself from the 
unity of the chunh : and consequently, according to St. Augustin, 
they who are in the church of Rome, are in the church of the 
schismatics. 

Mr. Maguire has asked, as it respects unity, what difference 
is there between discipline and doctrine ? Mr. Maguire himself 
told us, that while in essential matters the members of the church 
of Rome agreed, they do not accord in matters of discipline— 
and that men are at liberty to exercise their judgments upon ths 
notes attached to the Douay Bible. 

As to the passage relative to keeping the unity of the spirit, 
you plainly perceive that it speaks of a spiritual unity. 

" Careful to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace, one body and 
one spirit, as you are called in one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, 
one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, 
and in us all." — Eph. iv, 3, 6. 

The passage clearly refers, not to unity founded on non- 
essential points, but to unity founded on the great leading truths 
of Christianity. In the Protestant authorized confessions of 
faith, we can see that there exists an accordance on the funda- 
mental principles of revelation. 

Again, Mr. Maguire quoted from Philippians, 
" Let us also continue in the same rule." 

But I beg your attention to the preceding verse, — 

"If in any thing you be otherwise minded, this also God will reveal toyou.'* 
^iii, 16. 

This passage shows, that at that time some differences of 
opinion probably existed amongst them, and that the Apostles 
did not excommunicate them for entertaining those differenct^s ; 
but assured them at the same time that God would reveal to 
them the truth on the particular points concerning which differ- 
ences existed. Mr. Maguire has also quoted, 

" If any be contentious we have no such custom." — I Cor. xi, 16. 

Mr. Maguire and J. K. L. appear to have fallen into a similar 
misapprehension of the meaning of this passage. — " No such 
custom,'^ refers not to contentions, but to women sitting with 
the head uncovered in the assemblies of the saints. I find that 
certain differences existed and were allowed, even in the church 
at Rome. We read that one man believed that he might eat all 
things, another that he should eat herbs. — (Rom. xiv, 2.) — that 
one man esteemed one day above another, while another esteeii^ed 
dvmy day alike. — (5th v.) But what says the Apostle] 
" Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." — (5th r.) 

Oi as the Douay version has it — 

'*Let every man abound in his own sense." 



IHE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 271 

Mr. Maguire has informed us, that the primitive church cast 
out heretics. Every Protestant church, also, has a right to 
exclude from its communion, if it pleases. I admU that the 
Fathers spoke of one church ; but that one church was the mys- 
tical body of Christ, not confined to one external communioui 
portions of it belonging to the various Christian congregations. 
My friend has referred us to the passago of Cyprian, " he hag 
not God for his Father, who has not the church for his mothei/' 
and has twice quoted it. Now I say, that Cyprian, in a letter 
m which he reprehends Pope Stephen, once employed that pas- 
sage ill reference to Stephen himself, because he introduced 
divisions into the church. 

Mr. Maguire observes, that the church was not confined to 
che diocess of Rome ; that the Catholic church in primitive times 
was not the church of Rome — this is precisely the same language 
which he employed before. St. Firmilian, addressing Pope 
Stephen says : 

" Do not deceive yourself; you have cut yourself off from the church ; for 
he is truly a schismatic who has made himself an apostate from the commu- 
nion of ecclesiastical unity : for while you think you can excommunicate all 
Dther churches from you, you have only excommunicated yourself from them.' 
Cyp. Ep. 75, p. 228,— Edit. Oxon. 

St. Gregory the Great remarks : 

" If the church come to depend upon one, u must certainly fall.** 

And St. Cyprian says : 

" That therefore Christ madie the college of bishops numerous, that if one 
should fall or turn heretical, the rest might interfere for the saving of the 
flock." 

For he says ; 

" There is but one flock, and one episcopate, of which every bishop haa 
the whole in partnership with the rest." 

" Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur." 

The historian Socrates, who carried on Eusebius's Ecclesias- 
tical History from the year 329, to the year 440, informs us, 
that a great diversity existed among the different churches in 
respect to ceremonies and discipline, especially with -especi to the 
mirriage of persons in holy orders. He remarks, that the Apostle 
d d not giv3 any directions about holy days, their only design 
being to teach faith and virtue. He also says, that ther" were 
scarcely two churches which exactly agreed on the subject of 
prayers ; and concludes by observing, that to gii^e a catalogue 
of a\l the rites and customs ir use among Christians in all cities 
and countries, would be very difficult, if not impossible. — (L. 
V, c. 22.) St. Irenaeus notices, in terms rather of commenda- 
tion than censure, the diversity of fasts among his contemporary 
torethreu. — Ap. Euseb, 1, v, c. 22. Polycarp, bishop of Smynisu 



272 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

and Anicetijs, Bishop of Rome, held irreconcilably o/>pusit8 
opinions respecting the time of celebratirg Easter ; yet thej? 
did not violate Christian unity, as their less worthy successors 
have done on the same custom — the latter, as Eusebius states 
having permitted the former to administer the eucharist in his 
church. With regard to the re -baptizing those who had been 
baptized by heretics, the church of Africa, adopting the iume* 
morial usage of the ancient churches of Cappadocia, Cilicia, 
and Galatia, differed from that of Rome ; yet this difference 
occasioned no schism between them. St. Cyprian, some will 
be surprised to learn, held washing the feet to be a sacrament : 
and St. Augustin differed from St. Jerome, respecting the intro- 
duction of Jewish rites and usages into the Christian church ; 
but they did not depart from Christian charity. From the writings 
of St. Irenaeus, St. Firmilian, and Justin Martyr, we learn, that 
they who required conformity in matters, not evidently funda- 
mental on scriptural grounds, were regarded as violators of 
Christian unity. — (Iren. Ap. Euseb. 1. v, c. 24. Firm. Ap. 
Cyp. ep. 75, J. Mart. Dial, cum Tryph.) 

Hear the sentiment laid down in the Maynooth class book, 
p. 17 : 

" Schismatics, even those who should not err in doctrine, by the act of 
schism alone are excluded from the church, and are without the way o 
salvation." 

Or in other words, those, however correct their doctrines, who 
separate from the church of Rome, are excluded from the church 
of Christ, and are without the way of salvation ! I assert that 
the unity subsisting in the church of Rome is a unity without 
examination. Since the commencement of the discussion, 1 
received a letter from London, as did Mr. Maguire also (for the 
letter to me states that a duplicate was sent to Mr. Maguire.) 
It is signed '' An Inquirer after Truth." The writer remarks, 
that before the discussions took place m Ireland, his mind was 
not troubled with doubts — but that since these were held, he has 
been reading the scriptures under the direction of the Roman 
Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, and finds many difficulties 
raised in his mind in reference to the sacred volume. The unity 
of the church of Rome is, in truth, a unity that will not bear 
the test of examination. 

We have heard of the faith of the collier commended by 
Cardinal Bellarmine. The collier, when asked what it was he 
believed, answered : " I beUeve what the church believes." 
The other rejoined — " What then does the church believe V* 
He replied readily — " The church believes what I believe." 
The other anxious to bring him to the point, once more resumed 
his inquiry : " Tell me then, I pray you, what it is which you 



IHL eKOri:STANT CHURCIIKS. 2 7 J 

and th.^. church believe I" The only answer the cumei could 
give, was — "Why, truly, Sir, the church and I, boh believe the 
same thing /' — See Bellarmine de arte bene moriendif lib. ii, ch. 9, 
Hear a schoolman. Gabriel Byel maintains that, 

*'• If he who impHcitly believes the church, should think, misled by natural 
reason, that the Father is greater than the Son, and existed before him, or that 
the three Persons are things locally distant from one another, or the Ivke, he 
'is not 1 heretic, nor sins, provided he do not defend this error pertinaciously, 
for he believes what he does believe, because he thinks that the church believes 
60, subjecting his opinion to the faith of the church. For though his opinion 
hi 3rroneous, his opinion is not his faith, nay his faith in contradiction to hia 
opmions, is the faith of the church. What is still more, this implicit faith not 
only defends from heresy and sin, but even constitutes merit in heterodoxy 
itself, and preserves in that merit one who forms a most heterodox opinion, 
because he thinks the church beheves so." — Dr, CampbeWg Lectures on EccL 
His. vol. ii, p. 259. 

Mr. Maguire. — With respect to the 5th chapter of St. John 
I do assert, and I beg the public to bear it in mind, that the 
expression legevg is applied to the twenty-four who sat around 
the throne, and were called neither more nX)r less than Presby- 
ters. I am satisfied to let the passage be examintd t>y any 
learned man ; I here offer to submit the question to the adjudi- 
cation of any two individuals. — Let Mr. Pope select or^- and I 
shall select another, and then let them examine the corner Mr. 
Pope has recurred to the quibble about the difference bt veen 
the church of Rome and the Catholic church. I apped.1 to )ur- 
selves if I have not quoted upwards of twenty Fathers in refu- 
tation of the idle argument which Mr. Pope endeavours to 
construct on this matter. Have I not amply shown that the term 
" Catholic," was applied to all the churches in Asia, in Africa, 
in Spain, in Gaul, &c, &c, holding communion with the See of 
Rome ? I have proved that the holy Fathers all agreed in this 
interpretation of the words " Cathohc church." It is a mere 
play upon words with which my opponent has amused you. 1 
have laid before you abundant evidence that before the Reform- 
ation, the'e existed no other church which claimed to itself the 
title of " Catholic," but the church of Rome. With regard to 
the doctrine which Mr. Pope has broached, on the subject of 
ar.ity, T will only say, that all sects in the world are in the spirit 
of union, according to Mr. Pope. But our Saviour has corn- 
Dared the unity of his church to the union subsisting between 
lim and his heavenly Father ; therefore, that union must be of 
a most intimate nature, and the church must endeavour to imitate 
the wonderful union existing between God the Father, and God 
the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. With regard to the differ- 
ences of which Mr. Pope spoke, as existing in the Cathr»lic 
thurchf they involve not principles, and ^hat is a sufficient answer 



i74 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

to his very silly objection relative to the Dominicans, the Frsih 
ciscans, and the Jesuits. Mr. Pope has also introduced th« 
Jansenists — they were long since condemned b) the Catholic 
church in the bull Unigenitus. As to St. xlmbrose, 1 have already 
quoted at length his opinions on the necessity of unitv. Wifb 
respect to texts of scripture, I fearlessly appeal to every gentle- 
man who hears me, whether I have not brought forward more 
texts of scripture than Mr. Pope — whether my texts have not 
be<^n clearly and decisively in support of the doctrine which I 
maintain — and whether Mr. Pope has not offered violence to the 
meaning of scripture, by the strange and far-fetched interpreta- 
tions which he has sought to impose upon this learned assembly ? 
I ask any candid man here, whether Mr. Pope's explanations of 
some texts have not been more difficult and abstruse than the texts 
themselves? If such be not the fact, I know nothing of scrip- 
ture. What right has Mr. Pope to set up his private judgment 
in preference to the opinions of the Apostles who were inspired] 
He quoted the royal prophet as to the eastern kings who had 
combined against God ; and he introduced this as an argument 
against the existence of unity in the Catholic church ! Was 
here a church established then? If there were, he must then, 
^o sus^HiD his arguments, prove that it was lawful for the eastern 
king to divide themselves from that church, and to become 
sch inatics. 

there were not a church government then existing, his 
argument falls to the ground. I have laid before you this day, 
plain and obvious texts of scripture, regarding the necessity of 
dnity in ihe church of Christ. The doctrine which I advocate, 
I have shown to be distinctly founded upon scripture. I have 
defied Mr. Pope to show, that in regard to unity, there is any 
distinctior^ made between essentials and non-essentials in scrip- 
vure. The texts which have been quoted equally refer to matters 
of discipline, and of doctrine. If men will not be united- -if 
divisions, no matter how they originate, will exist; if people 
K>ecome split into sects and parties, and endeavour to tear their 
common parent asunder, surely the evil is not to be laid at the 
door of the Catholic church. She is not to be held accountable 
for those of her children who may disobey her — who violate 
charity, and disturb that peace which our Lord bequeathed to 
his church — 

" My peace I leave you — my peace I give you ; not as the world giveth do 
I give you." 

No plea — no pretext can ever justify a departure from that 
Christian harmony, of which our Saviour set an example, th^ 
necessity of which we find recommended from his sacred lips, 
and which he bequeathed to his church, to be observed and 



THE P.IOTESTANT CHURCHES. 275 

Br.ainiained without condition or alteration, unto the end of the 
world — 

" My f eact I leave you — my peace I give you ; not as the world givelh do 
4 give you." — John, xiv, 27. 

Mr. Pope quotes the holy Fathers ; it is rather extraordinary, 
indeed, that the Fathers should be quoted to show that unity in 
the church is not necessary. They affirm that there is no having 
the inheritance of Peter without the faith of Peter. So I believe. 
Thtire can be no inheritance possessed without faith ; and there 
can be no real faith, according to scripture, where there is not 
rharity and Christian union. I have prove d that the unity which 
is commanded by our Saviour, which was preached by the 
Apostles, and which was taught by their disciples in the first 
ages of Christianity, exists alone in the Catholic church. Mr 
Pope says that the unity which exists among Protestants is suf 
ficient. I call upon him to prove his position upon the authority 
of the word of God. He has quoted the church of Rome with 
regard to councils, &c, to show that she had not unity. But 
since the Reformation, it is admitted by Protestants, that they 
have no such unity. The illustrious Grotius lamented the 
schisms which existed among Protestants in his days ; and he 
said it would be almost better to return to Popery than io remain 
divided as they were. Luther himself threatened to return to 
Popery if their divisions increased. When he saw Calvin 
denying openly the real presence of Christ in the eu jiiarist, he 
lamented that he had ever quitted Popery. 

With regard to councils, the assertions of Mr. Pope are mere 
assumptions, and it is a well known rule in logic, that ' quod 
gratis asseritur, gratis negari debet.' I again challenge Mr, 
Pope to show from scripture the distinction between essentials 
and non-essentials. I call upon him to prove that there is a 
distinction drawn in scripture between doctrine and disciphne. 
He must prove that there is a difference upon an article of faith 
or that there exists a distinct breach of communion in the Cath- 
oUc church, in order to establish his position, that she aoes not 
possess unity. Differences as to private opinions amotigst pri- 
vate individuals he may prove, but these individuals did not 
Hist'irb that peace, and concord, and unity, which Christ left to 
his church, and which form some of the noblest marks — the 
most powerful arguments of her divine origin. 

He may show the existence of differences, not relating to 
matters of faith or discipline in the church, but they are not dif- 
ferences of (. pinion which place those who entertain them out 
of the church. He may prove the existence of such differences, 
but a breach of communion he caniK)t establish. He asks for 
Proofs that Peter was appointed the besd of the churrh. I thiolr 



HlQ THE WANT OF LMTY OF 

I have furnished ample proofs of the fact. He asserts chat it i« 
robbing Christ of his rights. This is a mere play upon words. 
There is no doubt that Christ in heaven is the sole and invisible 
head of the church — but knowing the frailties of man, our Lord 
deemed it necessary, in order to preserve the principle of unity, 
to appoint a visible head of his church to act as his instrument 
and agent upon earth. Is there ought in this derogatory fron? 
the majesty of God? Is not the king the visible head of t,h« 
established church of England ? His majesty, no doubt, will 
be highly pleased with Mr. Pope for denying his spiritual supe- 
riority. I always imagined that his majesty was the head of the 
Protestant church in these countries — the centre and bond of 
connection to keep it together. He is to preserve the homilies 
and the thirty-nine articles, and not to allow even the slightest 
deviation to be made from them. They contain certain rules 
respecting faith and discipline in the Protestant church, and the 
king is bound by oath not to suffer the slightest deviation from 
them. The king swears to support the establishment, and the 
test act excludes all from situations unless they take oaths which 
bind as to certain forms and rules of faith. The elements of 
union have been scattered in the Protestant churches, and they 
can never again be brought into combination. I should be glad 
to know from Mr. Pope, what did our Saviour mean when he 
baid to Peter : 

" Simon Barjona, lovest thou me more than these ; he saith to him, deai 
Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him, Feed my Lambs,'' 
John, xxi, 17. 

Our Saviour repeated the interrogatory ; Peter made a simila 
reply, and our Saviour again said ; '* Feed my Lambs." Bu 
when he repeated the question a third time, Peter became 
troubled, and exclaimed ; '* Lord thou knowest all things — 
Thou knowest that I love thee." Our Saviour then said to 
nim : *' Feed my sheep." 

Now, I defy the ingenuity of my friend to explain away thest. 
words. This address was not made to the other Apostles, but 
personally and individually to Peter. There is nothing in the 
fold of Christ but sheep and lambs (clergy and laity) ; ovei 
them Peter was appointed supreme pastor, and invested with the 
authority of government. Our Lord afterwards says to Peter : 

" 1 will give tx) thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatroever 
Ihou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoevei 
ihou shall loose upon eartk , it shall be loosed also in heaven." 

Could Mr. Pope quote any text of scripture against me equally 
lAM plain a^d obvious as the foregoing? Was he able to adduce 
any direct text in support of his private interpretation — while on 
(he other .land T proved all my doctrines by manifest texts ol 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 277 

penplures and upon the words of Christ and his Apostles. Mr. 
Pope endeavours to show that Peter could not be the successoi 
of Christ, as this evil would follow that the successor of Petei 
would be a greater man than St. John the evangelist, who lived 
after the death of Peter. To such straights has my opponent 
been reduced. He cannot deny that Peter had a successor. 
Why not prove that some difference on matters of faith arose 
between him and St. John ? But the successors of Peter were 
blessed with humility, charity, and divine faith — the first thirty- 
four of them suffered martydom. If they had happened to have 
a difference, they would have recurred to St. John for his advice 
and guidance — but that would not be denying their right to suc- 
ceed Peter, as the visible head of the church on earth. 

"If I then," said our Saviour, "being Lord and Master, have washed youf 
feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet." 

That act, I affirm, with the Catholic church, to be an act of 
humility, not a precept — but it is, to all appearance, a positive 
precept, and I repeatedly called on my friend to show by what 
authority he negle ted to observe it. He drew a distinction 
indeed between hot and cold climates, and the greater necessity 
which exists for washing the feet in the former than in the latter. 
But no such distinction is drawn in the text — the commandment 
of the Saviour is not to be regulated by hot and cold countries. 
He talks of the council of Jerusalem, and of Peter having 
spoken first — if Peter had spoken last what would that be to the 
argument? St. James gave a good advice, which was inspired 
by the Holy Ghost, and because it was adopted by Peter, there- 
fore Peter could not be the head of the Church ! This conclu- 
sion is certainly not agreeable to the premises — He says that 
no Pope claimed the title of ecumenical pastor until the year 
600 — w^hy there was no such word as ec.umenical in existence 
till that period. The word ' consubstantiality' is not in scrip- 
ture, and does not occur till 300 years after the Apostles, when 
we find it in the Athanasian creed, and the decrees of the coun- 
cil of Nice. If Mr. Pope's argument then on this head be valid 
against the supremacy of the Pope, it is equally valid against 
the Athanasian creed, and he should deny both. I admit the 
fact of Stephen throwing the body of the Pope into the Tyber, 
and the greater scoundrel he was, I affirm, for so doing. I 
admit there were some bad characters among the Popes. But 
1 have already drawn a distinction between infallibility and im- 
peccability. Besides, I never said that the infallibility of the 
Pope formed a portion of my creed. Christ promised his 
church that she would never fail in the faith, but that promise 
never in plied, that her children should be incapable of sin. Ag 
I have already told you, *he^e were eleven monstrous bad Popei 

24 



278 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

out of nearly three hundred good and virtuous characters whicb 
adorned the chair of Peter. Surely that is a vast majority to 
counterbalance the few bad names. Honorius was not a heretic. 
[t was not for heresy that he was deposed, but because he had 
been put into the chair by temporal power. He was suspected 
of being favourable to the Monotholites ; but I deny that it was 
ever proved that he was a Monotholite himself. I venture to 
affirm, that Mr. Pope will be called to an account for having 
denied the king's supremacy ; and it will be necessary, perhaps, 
for some of his friends to intercede for him with his majesty, 
lest, like Chancellor Moore and Bishop Fisher, he be, without 
further ceremony, committed to the tower. In that case he 
may, for once, have to acknowledge the efficacy of the interces- 
sion of saints, I maintain, that vegevg is applied in the New Tes- 
tament to the Apostles. But whether it be, or not, does not 
much matter for the argument. There is no sacrificing priest 
in the strict sense of the term, but Christ himself, who is at once 
the priest and victim, who is offered up as a perpetual sacrifice 
to fulfill the prophecy of Malachy, that in all parts of the worlJ 
a sacrifice ?'mll be offered to the Lord. 

"For from the rising of the sun to the going down of the same, my name 
IS great among the Gentiles ; and in every place a sacrifice is made, and a 
clean oblation offered to my name ; because my name is great among the 
Gentiles, saith the Lord of Hosts." 

If there had been only a single sacrifice offered up in Jeru- 
salem, according to Mr. Pope, then this prophecy of Malachy 
would not have been fulfilled. Mr. Pope has, by weak and idle 
Arguments, endeavoured to show that there could have been no 
successor to Christ. If Christ left a sacrifice and appointed a 
successor in his church, neither blasphemy nor wickedness can 
be imputed to those who believe the fact. — Christ promised that 
his church would never fail, and that he would remain with her 
in spirit, till the consummation of ages. But Mr. Pope, to sus- 
tain his argument, must prove that the whole church was for the 
space of 90 J years buried in darkness and error. Let those 
who will, believe it — I want not to make the Pope greater than 
other men. He is, like myself, a man, liable to the frailties of hu- 
man nature. The infallibility of the Pope is no doctrine of mine. 

Mr. Pope says, that he does not differ on essentials with the 
jhurch of England, and yet he denies more than one half of her 
articles of faith. Either he holds them essential or he does not. 
n the latter case his separation is unjustifiable, and he evidently 
*hows that he misunderstands the maxims of the gospel : he rends 
fhe seamless garment of Christ without cause. He should not 
for trifling reasons disturb that harmony which Christ ordained 
•should subsist between the members of his church — he shouW 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 27S 

conunue to hold communion with the bishops of the established 
chun'.h, and not set up a conventicle of his own. He sbould not 
break communion ne in minima pariicula. The holy Fathers 
held schism and disunion to be mortal sins. Mr. Pope spoko 
of a letter which he had received from London, and which he 
would have us suppose came from a reformed Catholic, anothei 
Blanco White. But latet unguis in hei^ha. I got a copy of the 
same too. I suspect that it came from the opposite party, and 
was intended to frighten me from this discussion. It was proba- 
bly a ruse employed to make me retreat, that my friend then, 
instead of suffering a defeat, might raise the shout of victory. 

Mr. Pope. — As to the word leqevg in the 5th of the apoca- 
lypse, the term in that passage is clearly bestowed upon pres* 
byters in heaven. My friend has appealed to any learned men 
o\\ the subject. He may prefer an ecclesiastic ; I therefore 
nominate Mr. Singer ; let Mr. Maguire name his referee. [Mr. 
Ciynch ivas then named by JVLr. JVlaguire^'] Mr. Maguire has 
not answered my quotation from the Psalms, on the ground in 
which I made it. I brought it forward merely as evidence, that 
unity, abstractedly considered, is not a proof of the true church. 
As to the distinction of essentials and non-essentials, I have 
shown that it was recognized by St. Paul, in the differences 
which existed in the church of Rome in his day, and which he 
allowed to continue. The scriptures, therefore, does make this 
distinction. The sacred volume, Mr. Maguire asserts, requires 
an agreement in discipline as well as in matters of faith ; and 
yet he before informed us that the church of Rome agrees, not 
in matters of discipline, but in matters of faith, and has therefore 
contradicted himself. I have already entered into the question 
of the apocryphal books, and shall not now reconsider it. Ac- 
cording to Mr. Maguire, the church has tn)o heads — Christ and 
the Pope : so it appears that Mr. Maguire thereby makes the 
church of Christ a monster. He refers me to the Saviour^s 
address to Peter, " Feed my sheep." — Augustine, (De Agone 
Christ, c. 30) and Ambrose, (De Dign. Sacred, p. 336) as I 
have already shown, declare it as their opinion, that Christ gave 
this privilege not to Peter only, but to all pastors. As Peter 
had denied the Saviour, our Lord saw it necessary to re-instate 
him in the apostolic office ; thrice did he address him in doing 
BO, in reference to his threefold denial. Here observe that 
IrentBus informs us, that Peter was not the only founder of the 
rhurch of Rome, but Paul also : 

*' Fundantes igitur et instuentes beati apostoli (Petrus et Paulus,) ecclesiam 
(Romanan) Lino episcopaluro administrandae ecclesije tradiderunt Suc- 
cedit auteniei Anacletus. Post eura tertio loco ab apostolis cpiscopatun 
lorlilur Clemens.'" 



280 THE WANT OF UNITY IF 

"The blessed Apostles, therefore, (Peter and Paul,) founding and arrang- 
ing the (Roman) church, delivered the episcopate for governing the church to 
Linus. But A nacletus succeeds to him : after him, in the third place, from 
the apostles, Clement obtains the episcopate." 

My friend has said, if Cnrist appointed the Popes as supreme, 
the exercise of their office would not be an assumption — but the 
appointment is the very matter at issue. We. have no ground 
either from reason or scripture to prove, that the Pope should 
bo regarded as supreme bishop. As to the supremacy of Pe'. r: 
if Peter was bishop of Rome, is it not remarkable, that Paul un 
writing to the church of Rome, should not mention the name i>f 
Peter I and after Paul had gone to that city, is it not strange 
that he should make no mention of Peter in his epistles written 
from that city to several churches. In the 4th of Colossians, 
10th and 11th verse, he says, that only Aristachus, and Mark, 
and Justus, were his helpers in the kingdom of God : if Peter 
had been at Rome, would he not mention him as a fellow-helper? 
On his trial all fled, — (2 Timothy, iv, 16.) Are we to suppose 
that Peter forsook him in the hour of his extremity. If Peter 
were really the bishop of Rome, I think you will agree with me, 
that he was at least non-resident. I am told by Mr. Maguire 
that there were at least eleven bad Popes. This is a great 
acknowl* igment. Genebrard, a Roman Catholic writer, how- 
ever, inarms us, that 

"Per annos fere 150, Pontifice circiter 50, a Jonanne scilicet octavo usque 
ad Leonem IX, a virtute majorem prorsus defecerunt, apostatici potius quarn 
apostolici." ^^ For nearly 150 years, about fifty Popes, namely, from John the 
Sth to Leo the 9th, revolted altogether from the virtue of their predecessors, being 
rather apostate than apostolic,^^ 

So that we have about 50 bad Popes instead of 11. A proof 
that Pope Honorius was a Monotholite heretic, shall appear in 
the printed report.* 

My triend has admitted, that there is no such officer 

IN THE CHURCH OF ChRIST AS A SACRIFICIISG PRIEST. Mr. 

ftlaguire has quoted a passage from the book of Malachy. I 
hold that the oblation there spoken of, is the sacrifice of praise 
and thanksgiving, and spiritual service : the repitition of the 
sacrifice of Christ would imply, that the sacrifice on Calvary 
was insufficient. 

♦The following passage from Dupin, a Roman Catholic historian, is given in proof 

kf the above statement : 

" The Roman church has so plainly acknowledged that Pope Honorius did advance 
Ihe error of the Monotholites, that, in the ancient breviary, she declares that he wai 
condemned with the other Monotholites, tor maintaining the doctrine of one will 

* * ******* 

It is more just and rational, to give credit to the one general council, where matteri 
tre examined to the bottom, than to sentiments of some private men, who judge o{ 
this fact according to their own interest oi prejudices. This will stand f^r certaia 
ihen, that Honorius was condemned, and jiistlytoo, as an heretic by the dth council. 
-Dupin's Eccies. Hist. vol. ii, page 16, 3d edtion, Dublin, 172.^. 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 281 

••T beseech you by the mercies of God, (saith the apostle) tlial ye |)i 95»en1 
fcur bodies a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable unto God, which is your 
reasonable service." — (Rotn. xii. 1.) 

I called your attention to a letter which I had received. It i* 
stranije that the same idea should have occurrnl to my mind, 
relative to the writer. I imagmed, that it came f'-om a Trie rid 
of Mr. Maguire's. I here solemnly declare, that I know not 
the author, or any thing whatever of the matter, save, that tho 
fetter came through the post-office to me. I will now show you 
that divisions have existed in the church of Rome. The Fran- 
ciscans held the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary, the 
Dominicans denied it. We read of the battles between the 
Dominicans and Jesuits in two popedoms — the Dominicans 
urging the doctrine of unconditional degrees. The Jesuits and 
Jansenists maintained a warfare from 1642 to 1705. As the 
members of the church at Corinth were censured by the iVpostles 
^or saying, " I am of Paul, and 1 of ApoUos, and 1 of Cephas ;" 
h.ivv can these parties escape a similar censure, by their prefer- 
ence for one person as their peculiar general — -one saying I am 
of Benedict — another, I am of Francis — and another, I am of 
Dominick. In the controversy between the Jesuits and Janse- 
nists, there appeared from the press, the " Torch of St. Augus- 
tin," '^SnufTers for St. Augustin's Torch," and lastly, "A Gag 
for the Jansenists." Soon after the Bull Unigenitus was issued, 
K.nd by this document the purest part of the church of Rome was 
put down — witness the demolition of Port Royal. 

" The Bull Unigenitus," says that most learned Roman Catholic, Doctor 
O'Connor, "was condemned by the Sorbonne immediately after the death of 
Louis ; and the Jesuit Le Tellier, the Monarch's confessor, was banished to 
La Fleche, loaded with pubhc execration. The condemnation of the ninety- 
first proposition, by its enforcing obedience to unjust censures^ loas Jelt to be 
repugnant to moral obligations. The refusal of the sacraments to those who 
would not subscribe the bull, disturbed the tranquillity of private life, and 
caused an insurrection of the magistracy, so that those who persisted in the 
refusal, were banished the kingdom. Benedict the fourteenth, fearful of the 
Btorm which thickened every day, issued a brief, declaring that, since he 
could not condemn the bulls of his predecessors, the bull should be registered, 
but that those who rejected it, ought to have the sacraments at their own risk^ 

I wonder, under such cucumstances, what priest would have 
administered the sacraments 1 

*^ Tiiis pohtical middle course was called the law of silence ^ and caused the 
greatest scandal of all. The Parliaments, disgusted rather than edified by 
th'.a politu;al middle course in matters of religion, protested against it, and 
utterly suppressed the bull, as repugnant to the liberties of tlie Gallican 
Church." — Columbanus, 6, xx. 

My fiiend has told us, that the Jesuits and Jansonists, the 
Franciscans and Dominicans, never broke the bond of Chris- 
tian charity. It is notorious that the Jesuits, ar i the secuiai oi 

24* 



282 THE WANT OF UNITY OP 

parish priest.^, are not on the most amicable terms, the lattei 
being jealous of their interference. We shall see how thet 
acted. Parsons, the Jesuit, writing agiinst the secular priests, 
thus describes them : — 

•*They be mad heads, sv ditious libellers, notorious caluminators, factious, 
turbulent, of scandalous I: /es, writing egregious, malicious untruths : impu« 
dent, factious, Mdcked slanderers; they are rebels to, and betrayer? pT ih% 
Catholic cause." — Parson's ^Spologttej chap, iv, p. 8. 

On the other side, the Seculars called the Jesuits " Schisma- 
tics, Donstists, Arians ; who make religion a mere political 
Atheistical devi<;e." And Watson calls Parsons 

" An Athcal strategemitor (page 160, Cluodlibets ;) a bastardly vicar ol 
hell ; a judge paramount on earth under the devil ; a Wolsey in ambition, 
Midas in immundicity, a traitor in action." 

And again, he says of all the Jesuits in England, that 

" They surfeited sorer than Heliogabalus ; that they were taught by their 
Arch-Rabbis to maintain (with their equivocations) dissimulation, detraction, 
sedition ; that they were busied in making strife between kings and kings, 
states and states, priests and priests, raising rebellions, murdering princes, 
stirring uproars every where : men unworthy to be called reHgious or Catholic, 
or Christian ; for, however they may boast of their perfection, their holiness, 
their meditation, and their exercises, yet their plots are heathenish and satani* 
cal, fit to set Machiavel, Lucian ; yea, Don Lucifer himself to school. 
Wretched Jesuits, who would have all Catholics depend on the arch-priest, 
when the arch- priest depended on John Garnet, Garnet upon Parsons, and 
Parsons on the devil." 

Mr. Maguire says, that there is no sacrificing priest ; and 
yesterday, in accordance with the doctrine of his church, he 
observed, that the sacrifice of the Eucharist is offered in an 
unbloody manner. I beg to remind him that the Bible says 

"WITHOUT SHEDDING OF BLOOD THERE IS NO REMISSION." 

(Heb. ix, 22.) With respect to transubstantiation, I beg to 
read you an extract from Gage's Survey of the West Indies. 
Lon. 1655, page 197 ; formerly a priest of the church of Rome. 

" One day, saying mass in the chief church, after the consecration of the 
bread, being with my eyes shut at that mental prayer, which the church of 
Rome calleth the Memento for their dead, there came from behind the altar 
a mouse, which running about, came to the very bread or wafer-god of the 
Papists, and taking it in his mouth ran away with it ; not being perceived by 
an}' of the people who were at mass, for that the altar was high by reason of 
the steps going up to it, and the people far beneath. But as soon as I opened 
my eyes to go on with my mass, and perceived my God stolen away, I looked 
»->oul the altar and saw the mouse running away with it ; which on a sudden 
aid so stupify me, that I knew not well what to do or say ; and calling my 
wits together, I thought that if I should lake no notice of the mischance, and 
any body else in the church should, I might justly be questioned by the In- 
quisition ; but if I should call on the people to look for the sacrament, then 1 
might be but chid and rebuked for my carelessness, which, of the two, 1 
thought would be more easily borne than the rigour of the Inquisition.— 
Whereupon, not knowing what the people had seen, I turned myself unta 
theni, and called them 'intc the altar, and told them plainly, that whil^ I WM 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 28S 

in my incmmto prayers and meditations, a mouse had carried away the 
Bif^rament; and that I knew not what to do, unless thcv would help me to 
lind it out asain. The people called a priest that was a* Viand, who presently 
brought in >nore of his coat; and, as if their God hy this had been eaten up, 
they presently prepared to find out the thief, as if they would eat up the 
mouse that h id so assaulted and abused their God. 'i hey lighted c.indlea 
and torches to find out the malefactor in his secret and hidden places of the 
wal' , and after much searching and enquiry for the sacrilegious beast, they 
found at last in a hole of the wall, the sacrament, half eaten up, which, with 
great joy, they took out ; and, as if the ark had been brought again fiom the 
Philistines to the Israelites, so they rejoiced for their new-found God, whom, 
with many people now resorted to the church, with many lights of candles 
and torches, with joyful and solemn music they carried about the church in 
procession. Myself was present upon my knees, shaking and quivering foi 
what m^ght b€ done unto me, and expectmg my doom and judgment; and 
as the sacrame; it passed by me, i observed in it. the marks and signs of the 
teeth of the mouse, as they are to be seen in a piece of cheese gnawn an4 
eaten by it. 

*' This struck me with such horror, that I cared not at that present moment 
whether I had been torn in a thousand pieces, for denying pubhcly that 
mouse-eaten God ; 1 called to my best memory all philosophy concerning 
substance and accident, and resolved within myself that what I saw gnawn, 
was not an accident, but some real substance, eaten and devoured by that 
vermin, which certainly was fed and nourished by what it had eaten ; anc' 
philosophy well teacheth, "substantia cibi (non accidentia) convertitur in 
substantiam aliti:" the substance (not the accident of the food or meat) is con* 
verted 01 turned into the substancs of the thing fed by it ana alimented. Now, 
here I knew that this mouse had fed upon some substance, or else how coulc 
the marks of the teeth so plainly appear? But no Papist will be willing tc 
answer that it fed on the substance of Christ's body — ergo, by good conse- 
quence it follows, that it fed upon the substance of bread ; and so transub- 
stantiation here, in my judgment, was confuted by a mouse; which mean 
and base creature God chose to convince me of my former errors, and made 
me now resolve upon what many years before I had doubted, that certainly 
the point of transubstantiation, taught by the church of Rome, is most dam- 
nable and erroneous; for, besides what before, I observed, it contradicteth 
the philosophical axiom teaching that "duo contradictoria non possint simul 
et semr^l de eodem verificari," tiuo contradictories cannot at once and at the self 
same time be said and verified of the same thing; but here it was so : for here 
in Rome's judgment and opinion, Christ's body was gnawn and eaten, and 
at the same time the same body, in another place, and upon another altar, in 
the hands of another priest, was not eaten and gnawn ; therefore here are 
two contradictories verified of the same body of Christ — to wit, it was eaten 
and gnawn, and it was not eaten and gnawn. These impressions at that 
time were so great in me, that I resolved within myself that bread really and 
truly was eaten upon that altai, and by no means Christ's glorious body 
which is in heaven, and cannot be upon earth subject to the hunger or vio 
lence of a creature." 

From the circumstance which I now read, we can clearly see 
Chat transubstantiation has no foundation in fact. 

In the next place, permit me to remark, if a church be an- 
swerable for all who break from her communion, then is the 
church of Rome answerable, upon her own showing, for the 
various heresies which have from time to time existed. She 
will not perhaps assent to this doctrine ; why therefore should 
she charg u.rj Protestant communion with the faults of thosa 



fc84 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

who depart out of it ? If the mother be not anijwerable foi the 
brood which leave her, then no Protestant church is answerablo 
but for those within its pale. 

Upon the authority of J. K. L. it is evident that there are 
differences in the church of Rome. Scarcely had he entered a 
foreign univenjity for the completion of his studies, when h^ 
himself informw us, that he — 

"Found himself surrounded by the disciples or admirers of D^Alembert, 
Kosseau, and Voltaire ; that he frequently traversed in company with th(>ni 
the halls of the Inquisition, and discussed in the area of the holy office those 
arguments and sophisms, for the suppression of which this awful tribunal wag 
ostensibly employed ; and that at that time, the ardour of youth, the genius of 
tiie place, the spirit of the times, as well as the examples of his companions, 
prompted him to inquire into all things, and to deliberate, whether he should 
take his station among the infidels, or remain attached to Christianity. 
Letters on the State of Ireland, by J. K. L. 1825, p. 55. 

Such is the authority from J. K. L. I assert, that the churcn 
of Rome is divided as to a standard Bible. The council of 
Trent gave its opinion, and pronounced its imprimatur, on an 
edition of the Vulgate, before it was published ! " Quam emen- 
datissime imprimatur," are the words of the council. The 
expression, " quam emendatissime," " as correct as possible^^ 
imphes the inability of the church of Rome to furnish an infalli- 
ble edition. I asserted that the Sixtine and Clementine editions 
differed in two thousand places. Mr. Maguire says that he has 
a copy of the Sixtine Bible. I again call upon him to produce 
it. I shall now read to you an extract, in order to show that he 
will find great difficulty in producing a copy : 

"Biblia Sacra, Vulgata Edit. Sixti V, jussu reco^nita atque edita Rom, 
typis Vatic, fol. This is the remarkable edition of Sixtus V, suppressed by 
his successor Clement VIII, who reprinted it in 1592 more correctly. This 
has corrections pasted over it in great abilndance ; and nothing but its great 
rarity makes it bring any price. This celebrated and scarce edition of the 
Bible is called Sixtus the Fifth's, having been translated and printed under 
the direction of that pontiff As soon as it appeared, it made a considerable 
noise in the church ; but on account of the many alterations from the ordi- 
nary text, it was suppressed and proscribed after the death of Sixtus. The 
Duke of Grafton purchased one on large paper, at Mr. Paris's sale, for 64i. 
55. 0^. — (Dr. Adam Clarke's Bibliographical Dictionary, vol. i, p. 202.) 

Let Mr. Maguire now produce his Sixtine Bible. 

Divisions exist in the church of Rome, as to the extent of 
the temporal power of the Pope. On this subject Bellarmino 
tells us — 

"There are three opmions. First, that the Pope, by divine right, has an 
iinlimited power (plenissnnam potestalem^ over the whole world in political 
ts well as ecclesiastical matters. A second opinion (which he calls a heresy^ 
rather than an opinion) is in the opposite extreme ; that the Pope has not by 
divine right, any temporal power ; nor can in any way command secular 
prin(^es. much less depose them, even though they may d 3serve to be other* 
Wiae deposed : nay, tiiat it is contrary to the law of God tliat the spiritual 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 286 

tnd temp jral swords be both committed to the same hand. The third 
opinion lies between the two former, and is commcnly held by Catholic diviiieSt 
namely, that the Pope, as Pope, has not directly and immediately any tern 
poral, but only a spiritual power; nevertheless, that by reason of the spirituaLy 
he has at least indirectly, a certain powers and that supreme in temporals,^'' — Df 
P«.oni. Pont. 1. iv, c. 5. § 15. 

The council of Lyons maintained the right of the Pope tvi 
depose princes. If I were a Roman Catholic, and were anxious 
tc know whether tht Pope possessed that right, although if a 
1 rans-alpine, I must believe the doctrine, how can I reconcile 
it with the declaration of the Apostle : 

*• He that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God ; and they 
that resist, purchase to themselves damnation ; for princes are not a terror to 
the good work but to the evil." — Rom. xiii, 1, 2, 3. 

Delahogue endeavours to get out of difficulties of this nature, 
by saying, 

" The church wished to define nothing concerning the celebrated contro- 
versy between the French and Italian churches, as is evident from those 
things which were done in the council of Trent, and from what we shall 
mention in the article concerning the prerogatives of the Roman pontiffi 
Therefore neither of these definitions is sufficiently clear to demand assent : 
hence different opinions concerning this question do not militate against unity 
of doctrine, which consists in this, that all doctrines are assented to, which 
have been clearly defined by a council assuredly general." — p. 51. certo 
CBCumenica. 

So that a man is left in doubt on such momentous points, by 
an infallible church, she not having defined the matter with 
sufficient clearness : a man therefore may maintain opinions 
different from those of others without any breach of unity. 
Upon the authority of Dr. Doyle, there is no standard as to 
doctrine in the church of Rome. In his examination on oath 
before the House of Lords, p. 502, he observes, 

" Besides the articles enumerated in the creed of Pius IV, there are others 
to be received as of faith. These are defined in the sacred canons of which 
some a7'e received entire, some in part, and of which no account can be obtained 
from the formularies to which the Roman Catholic bishops have referred as 
authentic." 

Dr. Doyle here states that some of the sacred canons arc to 
be received entire, some in part. Who then is to decide, what 
canons are to be received, and what rejected 1 How, I would 
ask, is the ignorant peasant to decide? Is he to go to his priest ? 
The matter, in truth, resolves itself into this, that the priest is 
the infallible organ of the church in the estimation of the people. 
The differences in the church of Rome are also great as te 
councils. The French church receives the council of Con* 
stance in ioto^ others do not. Bellarmine gives us the varieties 
of opinion as to general councils. He furrishes a list of general 
councils, partly confirmed and partly rejected ; (De Concili - 
1. i, c. O.) and (in c. v. and de Rom. Pont 1. iv, c. 11^) be says 



THE WANT OF UNITY JF 

that those councils allowed to be general were njiircd by ik^ 
interpolations of heretics. The council of Basil once cecmne- 
nical, afterwards became, we are told, a schismatical conventi- 
cle. — (Bellarmine de Eccl. Mil. c. 16.) Is there then any 
standard of faith to be found in that church in which such doubts 
exist, as to its councils arid canons. 

The coancil of Constance, the Pope's legate concurring 
decreed that a council was above the Pope. — (Bellarm. de Rom. 
Pont. 1. ii, c. 11.) That of Constance deposed three Popes, 
and set up another ; while the council of Florence and Trent 
decreed, that the Pope is above a council. Here we have 
council against council. He has not informed us, what are the 
characteristics of a general council. Is it the orthodoxy of the 
doctrine which is to characterize a council, or is it the council 
which is to characterize the doctrine ? If the former, why should 
the council of Tyre be rejected, which was summoned by the 
same authority as that of Nice ? If the latter, who is to decide 
upon the characteristics of a general council 1 

Thus I have gone in some degree over the same ground of 
argument that I traversed the second day ; by which I showed 
you that infallibility does not exist in the church of Rome. 
Some of the arguments which destroy its claim to infallibility, 
it is plain, overturn its pretensions to unity. The first council 
of Lyons has been doubted by some. The fifth Lateran by 
others. The fifth council, assembled at Constantinople, was 
held in defiance of Pope Vigilius; yet it has been received by 
his successors ; and in fine throughout " the church" as ai 
oecumenical council. Vide Baron, in Justiniano et Vigilio 
torn. 7, et Sirmund. Praefat. in Secund. 

Let Mr. Ma^uire come to the point — let him, if he please, 
bring forward his catalogue of sects, and his stories about fana- 
ticism ; but let him also answer my questions, why councils 
have been against councils ? and how his church can escape the 
anathema, which the council of Ephesus pronounced on any 
who should add to the Nicene confession of faith ? 

Mr. Maguire . — I called upon my friend Mr. Pope to prove 
ihat there is a distinction drawn in scripture between essentials 
and non-essentials. What he has adduced from St. Paul to the 
Corinthians makes against hnn. St. Paul rebukes the Corin- 
thians because some amongst them said they were of Paul, 
others of Cephas, others of Apollos, and others of Christ ; and 
he condemns their indulging in such frivolous contests. But 
faith, morality, and discipline had not been violated, and it ia 
very foolish to bring this text forward as a proof that differenceg 
u«eife tillowed to exist. St. Paul on all occasions insisted upon 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 28t 

the necessity of charity ; he tells us himself, that if he possessed 
faith sufficient to move mountains — that is, a faith of the strongest 
description — and had not charity, it would profit him nothing.. 
In this instance the Corinthians were guilty of a breach of charit} 
not of faith or discipline ; they were making contentions and 
divisions as to the superior preaching of Paul or of Cephas, afiO 
St. Paul calls upon them equally to give up such frivolous cor>- 
tentions, and to live in charity. This text, '^^ugh quoted l>T 
Mr. Pope, obviously makes against him, for here we iind tl e 
Corinthians condemned for differences which did not involve 
matters of faith, morality, or discipline. 

The arguments adduced by Mr. Pope against my church, are 
founded upon a great misconception of her doctrines. He hag 
throughout manifested a surprising ignorance of her real tenets. 
He has resorted to a negative argument to prove a positive fact. 
Because St. Paul, in his epistle to the Romans does not speak 
of Peter, therefore Peter was never at Rome. Because St. 
Paul wrote an epistle to the Romans relative to the discharge 
of their moral and spiritual duties, and helped Peter in his mis- 
sion, therefore St. Peter was not the successor of Jesus Christ 
upon earth. — A notable conclusion truly ! 

I affirm that our Saviour appointing a visible head for his 
church upon earth, acted in nowise derogatory to his heavenly 
character, but did that which was worthy of divine wisdom. 
My friend, by negative arguments, seeks to deprive us of a 
visible head — now Catholics acknowledge the Pope to be the 
successor of St. Peter, the visible head of the church on earth, 
and the agent and instrument of the invisible head, Jesus Christ, 
who is hoaven. You are to decide whether you will believe the 
holy Fathers, or my friend Mr. Pope — you must reject either 
one or other, for they are directly opposed. Mr. Pope has 
made a quotation from Genebrardus. 1 affirm that if the context 
of the author be examined, it will not be found to prove any 
thing against Catholic doctrine. Mr. Pope seeks to establish 
the fact of disunion in the church by a reference to the battles 
amongst the Jesuits and Dominicans on the subject of the Con- 
ception. With regard to every thing which has not been defined 
by the Catholic church, every Catholic is at liberty to entertain 
his private opinions ; toe church has not thought proper to definu 
any thing but what is necessary for the preservation of the de- 
posit of faith. Mr. Pope recurs to the argument relative to the 
sacrificing priest. I have already said, that taking the words in 
the strict and rigorous sense, Christ ^an alone be called the 
sacrificing priest. He is the Assistans Pontifex futurorum 
boaorum. Christ himself is both the priest and the victim, oi 
te^ St Augustin has it, ha is the pnest himself offerings stn^ 



288 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

himself the victim. The priest pronounces the words : Christ 
performs the action, therefore the priest himself does not tran- 
substantiate. With regard to Columhanus, I deny that he is to 
be quoted on this subject as an authority against the Catholic 
church. His lucubrations on this subject have not been ap- 
proved of. It is remarkable, that Mr. Pope quotes as Catholii 
historians those only who have risen in opposition to the recog- 
oisod and lawful authority of the church. 

I now come to the man who was converted by the mouse. 
\\ ha< a powerful argument against the doctrine of transubstan- 
liation ! Mr. Pope imagines that he has caught me in a mouse- 
trap, but I will show that I can squeeze myself out of it. 1 
worship a Saviour, who suffered himself to be spat upon and to 
be scoffed at. In his divine humility he endured all, and would 
not retaliate upon his enemies. He was treated as a common 
malefactor — he was crucified on the cross between two thieves — 
he was covered with every species of indignity and contumely, 
yet he prayed to his heavenly Father to forgive his enemies, for 
they knew not what they did. He was a scandal to the Jews, 
and a folly to the Gentiles. The indignities which our Saviour 
suffered from the Jews, should be an argument, according to 
the principles of Mr. Pope, against the divinity of the Redeemer 
— an argument which has been plausibly put forward, both by 
Jews and Gentiles. He says, the church of Rome is answera- 
ble for all heretics. They had been her adopted children, no 
doubt, but they abused their right — they rejected her authority, 
ir.ii she banished them from her o-a account of their scandalous 
conduct, as rebellious and unnatural children. They are gone 
out from her. He who left the ark of Noah was drowned in 
the deluge. 

I defy my friend to point out any substantive error in the Six- 
tine edition of the Bible, or to prove that any material alterations 
were made in the Clementine edition. The council of Trent 
commanded that a copy should be made out quam emendatissime. 
Though there was nothing substantially erroneous in the edition 
then extant, yet it re'quired many verbal emendations : accord- 
ingly as he ought, Clement had a pure and correct copy of the 
Bible made out. Mr. Pope has recurred to the question of infal- 
libility but T shall not be drawn by such a manoeuvre from the 
subject before us. The doctrine of the priest may be infallibly 
true, although he himself may be very fallible. The priest is the 
organ of infallibility, as long as he teaches the true doctrine of 
the Catholic church ; and I here pubhcly assure you, that if a 
priest broached any doctrine contrary to that church, when preach- 
ing from his altar, the people would close their ears against th« 
new doctrine, and either turn him out of the chafiel or retire 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES 28S 

themselves. Mr. Pope has aoain alluded to the general coun- 
cils, and has endeavoured to raise some cavilling objectior s with 
respect to the council of Basil. Though that council had been 
lawfully convened, yet, when eighty-nine Arian bishops were 
nitroduced by the Emperor, the Catholic bishops left the assem- 
bly, and refused to sit in council with the heretics. This is the 
ijouncil, forsooth, which Mr. Pope quotes against me ! I already 
told you, that in the commencement the council was regularly 
convened, and therefore legitimate. Here lies the quibble of 
my ingenious friend. But the junta of Arian bishops created 
disgust and alarm in the minds of the orthodox bishops, and they 
accordingly quitted the heretical assembly. I have here a list 
which I shall now read to you, containing an enumeratic::^ of the 
various Protestant sectarians : 

" Lutherans, Calvinists, Agricolists, Anabaptists, Re-baptizers, Storkites, 
Carlostadians, the three latter banished from Wittemberg by Luther for heresy, 
Muncer (executed for rebellion ; 7000 Anabaptists killed :) Adamites, Apos- 
tolics, Taciturns, Perfects, Innocents, Libertines, Sabattarians, Ciancukrians, 
Manifestarians, Weepers, Rejoicers, Indifferents, Sanguinarians, Antima- 
rians (a sect of Anabaptists ;) Anidronicans, Antitrinitarians, Bacularians 
^a sect of Anabaptists, who deemed it a crime to have any other weapon 
ihan a staff;) Puritans, (a sect of rigid Calvinists, that indulged in various 
absurdities ; some have killed cats for matching mice on a Sunday, but scru- 
pulously deferred the execution till Monday ; others have knocked out the 
heads of their barrels of beer for working on a Sunday, &c, &c, ;) Gtuakers, 
Rustics, Insurrectionists, Sandemanians, by John Glass — Kiss-of-charity 
boys. Love-feasts, Seceders, Shakers, Socinians, Southcottians, Swedenbor- 
gians, or New Jerusalemites, Theophilanthropists, headed by Tom Paine, 
Universalists, or Salvation every where, Ubiquitarians, Zuinglians, Muggle- 
tonians, New-lights, Seekers, Armenians, David-Georgians, their author pro- 
claimed himself the Messiah, Tunkers (not Tinkers,) they deny eternal 
lunishment. Episcopalians, Familists, or Family of Love, their author held 
limself above Christ, Fifth-raonarchy-men, Illuminati, Inspired boys, Inde- 
pendents, Infernalians, held Jesus went to hell and was tormented there, 
Johnsonians, deny the Trinity and pre-existence of Christ, Jumpers, Groan- 
srs. Laughers, Latitudinarians, Methodists, Robinsonians,Brownists, Ranters, 
Baptists, Pedobaptists, cum multus aliis." 

Here we find tinkers and cobblers, and other such persons, 
setting up as the preachers of the word of God. Every one of 
those sects contends bitterly against the principles of the others 
and all of them differ more from each other than we do from the 
church of England. 

Mr. Pope has retailed to you a blasphemous story relati\ e to 
the blessed Eucharist, upon the credit of an apostate priesi i 
think it quite unworthy of a foimal reply. I shall merely give 
you the following story by way of antithesis — it describes pretty 
accurarely the frantic fits produced by the imaginary workmgs 
of a certain spirit upon the imagination, highly sublimated with 
the pride and self-importance rf private judgmenf. The story 
IS related of a pious Puritan, who, in the presence of our tnx^ eller. 

25 



I 



290 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

had executed holy justice on his favourite cat foi iin iinp^oiif 
violation of the Sabbath — 

Veni Banbnry, oh! profanum! 
Ubi vide Puritan um 
Felem facientem fiireni 
Gluia Sabbato stravit murem. 
Arrived at Banbury, oh ! profane ! 
I there beheld a Puritan, 
In pious rage hang up torn cat 
For catching on Lord's day a rat 

I shall now read to you an extract from Dudithius, a eaxned 
Protestant divine, in his epistle to Beza : 

" What sort of people are our Protestants, struggling to and fro, and carrieo 
about with every wind of doctrine, sometimes to this side, sometimes to that / 
You may, perhaps, know what their sentiments in matters of religion are to- 
day : but you can never certainly tell what they will be to-morrow. In what 
article of religion do these churches agree which have cast off the bishop of 
Rome ? Examine all from top to bottom, and you will scarce find one thing 
affirmed by one, which was not immediately condemned by another for 
wicked doctrine." 

The same confusion of opinions was described by an English 
Protestant, the learned Dr. Walton, about the middle of last 
century, in his preface to his Polyglott, where he says — 

" Aristarchus heretofore could scarce find seven wise men in Greece ; but 
with us, scarce are to be found so many idiots. For all are doctors, all aie 
divinely learned ; there is not so much as the meanest fanatic or jackpudding, 
who does not give you his own dreams for the word of God. The bottomless 
pit seems to have been set open, from whence a smoke has arisen which has 
darkened the heavens and the stars, and locusts have come out with stings, a 
numerous race of sectaries and heretics, who have renewed all the ancient 
heresies, and invented many monstrous opinions of their own. These ha^ve 
611ed our cities, villages, camps, houses, nay, our pulpits too, and lead the 
poor deluded people with them to the pit of perdition." 

Such is the opinion of Dr. Walton, who will not be considered 
a light authority on the subject. I can also produce another ex- 
cellent Protestant authority to the same effect: — no less than that 
of Baxter, the great oracle and organ of the sect of Puritans :— 

" He who is out of the church is without the teaching, the holy worship, 
the prayers and discipline of the church ; and is out of the way where the 
spirit doth come ; and out of the society which Christ is related to. For he 
is tlie Saviour of the body ; and if once we leave his hospital, we cannot 
expect the presence and help of the physician. Nor will he be pilot to thera 
that leave his ship ; nor captain to them that separate from his army. Out 
of the ark there is nothing but a deluge ; and no place of rest, or safety fw 
his soul." 

In 1645, the collected body of ministers protested solemnly 
against the toleration of sects : and in their remonstrance they 
say, 

" We detest and abhor the so-much-endeavoured toleration." 

And in a provincial assembly, they denominate schism f 
^ soul poison,'* 



THF PROTEST.iNT fllURCHES. 291 

111 an)ther provincial meeting they call it : 

*' A sword in a madman's hand ; a cup of poison in the hands of a ^hild, 
1 city of refuge in men's conscienc^"s for the devil to fly to." 

In short, this, compressed ir to one word, was the general senti- 
ment ; therefore the general language of these men was, that 

" Schism is a damnable sin, and whatsoever is contrary to the gospel caw 
have no right, and therefore should have no liberty." 

Again, I have the authority of the learned Bayle for :he 
destructive and ruinous consequences of schism : 

" I do not know (says he) where one could possibly find out a more grie- 
vous sin than is that of rending the mystical body of Jesus Christ ; of that 
spouse which he has purchased at the expense of his own blood ; of that 
mother whom he has begotten in God ; who feeds us with that milk of under- 
standing, which is devoid of fraud: and conducts us in the path which leads to 
eternal happiness. What crime can indeed be possibly greater than to rise 
up against such a parent ; to defame her through the world ; and to make 
her children, when they can doit, rebel against her ; tear them by thousands 
from her womb, in order to drag them to eternal flames ; and not only them, 
but their posterity forever. Where does there exist a crime of high treason 
against God, if it be not here ? A husband who loves his wife, and is at the 
same time assured of her virtue, considers himself more mortally wounded 
by the calumnies and libels that would make her pass for a prostitute, than 
'le would by any injuries proclaimed and pubhshed against himself. Amidst 
all the crimes into which a subject can fall, there is not any one more grievious 
than that of rebelling against his lawful sovereign, and endeavouring at the 
same time to excite as many provinces as he can to dethrone him. INow 
precisely m the same proportion as supernatural interests exceed all temporal 
interests, just so does the church of Christ surpass all civil societies. And the 
consequence, therefore, is, that schism in the church exceeds in the greatness 
of its criminality, the guilt of all other acts of sedition." 

" Schism, (says Mr. Wix,) does not prevail merely out of the church, il 
abounds within it. And among those who profess themselves its membors. 
very httle attachment to it is toie found. It is, moreover, most seriously lO 
be lamented, that very many of those, who boast the warmest attachment to 
her docirines, have arrogated to themselves the knowledge of the gospel, in 
a sense, which excludes all others from a due conception of it, whose opin 
ions, or feelings, accord not with their own. In consequence of this, we 
observe much spiritual disorder ; a variety of opinions of faith, and discipline 
both in the church, and out of :he church. And thus the greatest injury is 
inflicted on the unity of the gospel of Jesus Christ." 

Such, too, is the language of many other writers of the 
establishment. 

'* The establishment, (said one of its most eloqueut prelates) is a tree, that 
.8 shivering to pieces with wedges made out of itself." 

Dr. Daubeney, a Protestant divine, speaking of the Methodists., 
Bays, 

" They are a set of ignorant, self-sufficient enthusiasts, industriously push- 
ing themselves into every parish, creeping into houses, and leading captive 
ihose silly persons who are weak enough to be led by them. They are, 
many of them, of so low a description, as to be obliged to substitute their 
marks for their names." 

" In this country (observes M. Stykes) vast sums of money are gaii\ed by 
schism : and prodigious collections are annually made for the support of iti 
la nisters. Inferior persons, assuming the situation of teachers, are leadens 



292 THE WANT OF UMTY OP 

of the multitude — Thus in the worship ofcalves, (1 Kings, jii, 33) thepriesU 
were made of th . lowest of the people. It would now seem, having preach- 
ers of all sorts, as if we had Moses' wish ; and all the people were propheta 
—(Num. xi, 28.) 

Dr. Daubeney informs us, that there was a seminary in Bath 

" In which hoys are trained for preaching ; and at about twelve or thirteen 
years of age, wlien considered quahfied for pubUc exhibition, are sent to 
undertake the services of religion." 

Speaking of the tiny heroes of the pulpit, Dr. Valpy tells as, 
ihat one of them, 

" A lad twelve years old, went about the country preaching extempore. 
He became popular, and was much admired and patronised." 

This accounts, at once, both for the multitude of our preach- 
ers, and for the contusion which they generate ; — preaching i$ 
now a very profitable^ and a very lazy trade. 

" Each pious 'prentice freely may dispense 

Salvation ; licensed now for eighteen pence : 

And should devotion tempt him from his awl, 

He'll get his orders, if he gets his call." — Religio Clerici, 

I could adduce a number of other Protestant authorities, all 
condemning in the most positive terms the disunion which exists 
in the Protestant churches. It is unanimously admitted by all, 
that they have no fixed and common principle to direct them. 
Mr. Pope set up his private judgment, and would have every 
man worship it as an idol. He contends that all have a right to 
exercise their private judgment, and to choose what religion they 
please. According to his principles, that book which is inspired 
of God, will be made to dictate 150 different religions — the spirit 
of truth will be changed into the spirit of error. Every wild 
fanatic will appeal to private interpretation, and internal illumin- 
ation. The book of God will be produced to support the most 
abominable blasphemies, and real religion will be utterly 
destroyed. It was that devastating principle which superinduced 
the ruin of the Protestant religion in the Protestant churches of 
Germany and France. It was by such a principle that the 
Episcopal church of Scotland was pulled down ; and the same 
principle will effect shortly similar results in Ireland, in regard 
to the established church, if it meet with the encouragement it 
has hitherto received. I call upon the bishops of the established 
church to step into the breach, and to save their church from 
utter destruction. If they do not oppose this pri *ciple — if the 
Catholics do not step forward and perform their duty in counter- 
acting such a destructive principle, the bishops and parsons of 
the established church must soon give way to the low, ignorant, 
pettifogging, self-sufficient preachers of " the word." Thia 
language may appear strange in my mouth : but I should rathei 
see the Protestant established church contii ue, than that it should 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 293 

D« ovei turned by such men. Tenets have been faLely imputed 
to the Catholics, which they have frequently and publicly denied 
Our articles of faith have been publicly defined by the church ; 
and all persons who are willing to inquire, can easily karn what 
those articles are. 

Mr. Pope has ridiculed the honest man, of whom Bellarmina 
speaks, and who, when asked what was his belief, replied, tha* 
he believed what the church believed. That is my doctrine-- 
I believe what the church believes, and the church belie\ es what 
1 believe. I have been long looking for the particular opinions 
which constitute the rule of faith professed by my friend — but 
he has abstained from any thing of the kind. He could not 
prove, that any three bcioks of the Old or New Testament are 
absolutely inspired, unlesis, indeed, we admit the authority of his 
internal evidence. According to him, that internal evidence is a 
meridian sun, which illuminates the sacred volume. If so — it 
is strange, that though such a powerful light should be in exist- 
ence, so many should be involved in darkness, and that there 
should have been millions of Catholics, who, for 1800 years, 
could never discover this light, which, according to Mr. Pope, 
shines forth with such resplendent lusture. But it is but an airy 
phantom — a wandering meteor which leads not to truth, but to 
doubt and error. It is the production of heated and enthusiastic 
imaginations. The ancient heretics laid no claim to internal 
evidence — ihey denied its existence. They wanted that borrowed 
light which illumines the Evangelizers of the present day. If 
th:s internal evidence be so plain and discernable, as Mr. Pope 
would have us believe, why was it not claimed by the ancient 
heretics — why did so many millions remain so unconscious of its 
existence, and why did it continue so long hidden and obscured, 
as it were by a cloud, until the noon-day of evangelical reformation 
had arrived 1 How could all this happen, if this light shine forth 
directing to that city, which is built upon a mountain, and which 
can be seen by all men 1 

Mr. Pope. — Gentlemen, I have already referred to the epistle 
to ttie Romans, to prove the distinction between fundamental 
and iion-fundamental doctrines. I admit the evil of exalting one 
man anove another by saying' '* I am of Paul, and I of Apollos," 
and we charge the church of Rome with saying, " I am ot 
Cephas,*'^ ot Peter, though forbidden by St. Paul. 

*' Whereaj there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal 
t,nd walk according to man 1 For wiiile one saith, I indeed am of Paul , and 
another, I am oi" Apollos •, are you not men ? What then is Apollos and 
what is Paul ? The ministers of Him whom yo j have beheved > an i ^ 
B\&:y one as the Lord hath given." — 1 Cor. iii, 3, 4 5. 

25* 



!D4 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

In proof that Paul, as well as Peter, founded the chuich oj 
Rome, I referred to the testimony of Irenaeus. Mr. Maguirc 
[ am authorized to say, has full permission to consult the librarj 
of Trinity college, in order to examine my quotations. As to 
the argument about the Deists, I appeal to men of sense, whether 
fhat objection has not been answered. The Roman Missal (ir 
ehe Rubric de Defectibus, circ. Miss. Occurrentibus,) has i 
whole chapter on the accidents which may occur in the celebra 
tion of the mass. I beg to call your most particular attentior 
to that part of said Rubric. As to the number of sects, I would 
observe, that the Protestants reject many of them. The churcn 
of Rome has done the same. Why are not real Protestants, as 
well as the church of Rome, entitled to disclaim alliance with 
those who are in error ] We have council against council. 
The council of Ephesus anathematizes any, who should add to 
the Nicene creed. I ask, is not Pius TV, who has added thereto 
so many articles, distinctly condemned, as well as all who make 
use of this creed ? Yet that is the creed adopted by Roman 
Catholics at this day. 

The second council of Nice assigns, as one reason for 
worshipping the image of Christ, that he is not sensibly present 
on earth, but only in his divinity. — Act. 4, p. 305. It also 
anathematizes all who assert that Christ was not circumscribed 
as to his human nature. Is not this the church of one age 
against the church of another 1 

As to the doctrine of intention^ " saltem faciendi quod facit 
ecclesia,"-— (Trent Cone. Sess. v. can. 11.) I have heard a 
diiference of opinion expressed — (so much for unity.) At the 
discussion at Carlow, a Roman Catholic priest, under the juris- 
diction of Dr. Doyle, asserted tnai the doctrine of intention was 
merely a probable opinion among divines. 

The rubric of the Missal says, 

" If any priest should have before him eleven hosts and should intend to 
consecrate only ten, not determining which ten he intends, in these cases be 
does not consecrate, because intention is required. It is otherwise, il 
thinking indeed that there are ten, he should wish however to consecrate al' 
Che hosts before him ; for then all will be consecrated, and therefore the priest 
ought always to have such intention, namely, of consecrating all those which 
are placed before him for consecration." — Ronwn Missal, Dublin, Richard 
Coyne, 1822, Rubric de Defect, p. 53. 

And here permit me to inquire, as transubstantiation depends 
on the intention of the priest, how is an individual to know 
whether the priest has the intention? Can he enter into his 
keart ? In cases where there is no transubstantiation, is there 
not direct idolatry in worshipping that which, by the acknow- 
ledgment of the church of Rome, is not God ? and how can anj 
individual, according to such a principle, be sure that he is not 



THE PROTESTANT CHUR UHES. 296 

guilty of idolatry, the intention of the priest being necessary td 
transubstantiation 1 The people, therefore, cannot know, even 
according to their own principles, whether they worship God or 
not. I shall be told that it is not the fault of the people, for 
they do not mean to worship that which is not consecrated, but 
to worship God. So say idolaters — we only worship God through 
the image. Hence, this mode of arguing would justify idolatry 
generally. Again ; bear in mind, that this doctrine of intentic n 
is not confined to the eucharist ; it runs through the whole sys- 
tem. How iocs Mr. Maguire know whether Popes and Bish- 
ops, at ordinations, have always intended to ordain? How does 
Mr. Maguiie know whether he is a priest or not ? He is not 
certain that the bishop who ordained him, intended to ordain him. 
Neither does he know whether he is baptized or not ; for unless 
the officiating priest had intention, the outward ceremony failed : 
marriage also according to the church of Rome, is null and void, 
unless intention accompanies the performance of the ceremony 
on the part of the priest. See, then, the awful results of this 
pernicious doctrine ! 

My friend took hold of an expression in an extract from Theo- 
doret, which I quoted yesterday. I again say, that his argument 
would fail if he believed in transubstantiation. The change in 
which he beheved, was a moral change. I admit his language 
is strong. I shall read to you another passage : — 

" Jacob, (says Orthodoxus,) called the blood of the Saviour the blood of 
the grape. For, if the Lord be denominated a vine, and if the fruit of the 
vine be called wine, and if from the side of the Lord fountains of blood 
and water, circulating through the rest of his %ody passed to the lower 
parts ; well and seasonably did the patriarch say. He washed his garments 
m wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes. As we then call the mystic 
fruit of the vine after its consecration, the blood of the Lord, so he called the 
blood of the true vine, the blood of the grape. — Our Saviour indeed, changed 
the names ; for to his body he gave the name of the symbol, while to the 
symbol he gave the name of his blood ; and, having called himself a vine, 
he thence consistently appUed the appellation of his blood to the symbol. 
But the scope of such language is perfectly familiar to those who have been 
initiated into the mysteries. For our Lord required that they who partake ot 
the divine mysteries, should not regard the nature of the things which they 
see ; but that in the change of names they should believe that change which 
is wrought by grace. Inasmuch as he who called his own natural body 
wheat and bread, and who further bestowed upon himself the appellation of 
A vine ; he also honoured the visible sympols with the name of his body and 

blood, NOT CHANGING THEI-f NATURE, BUT ADDING GRACE TC NATURE."— 

Theod Dial, i, open vol. iv, p. 17, 1&. 

As to Pope Gelasius, it does not much matter whether the 
fvork from which I quoted, was written by him or by Gelasius 
Cyzinicus ; it proves that opposition was made to transubstan- 
tiation, a doctrine which was groioing at that time. 

The council of C^alcedon decreed, ♦bat equal honour should 



296 THE WANT OF UNITY OP 

be paid to the bishops of Rome and Constantinople. On the 
contrary, the Pope is now calkd God's supreme vicar With 
respect to general councils, Gregory Nazianzen, wr ting in 
Procopius, says, 

•* To tell you plainly, I am determined to fly all conventions of bishopi. 
For I never yet saw a coiKicil that ended happily. Instead of lessening, they 
invariably augment this evil." 

Here is the opinion of a man respecting councils, who had 
himself been present at the second general council. 

The Marquess of Pescara, Panan, who was present at the 
council of Trent, as the charge d'affairs of the Spanish ambas- 
sador, used often to say, that 

"Hd deserved much credit for being a Christian, after having been present at 
two elections of Popes, and at one council,''^ — See Literary Life of Don Joaquin 
Lorenzo De Villanueva, 2d vol. Append. Lo sucecido en el councilio de 
Trento desde 1561 hasta que se acabo, written by Don Pedro Gonzalez de 
Mendoza, bishop of Salamanca. 

Fiom the testimony of a Roman Catholic, you may judge of 
the purity and principles by which the Fathers of the council of 
Trent were actuated. Mr. Maguire talks of infallibility being 
calculated to end divisions. The Inquisition itself cannot sup- 
press the inward feeHngs of the heart. The church of Rome 
may succeed in putting down outward dissensions. But such 
peace is like that of the dogs of Scylla, who howled and barked 
at each other, and then retreated into the unity of her cavernous 
womb. 

The church of Rome, even in her boasted uniformity of wor- 
ship and ordinances is nOt agreed. For instance, the church of 
Abyssinia offered about 2C0 years ago, to adopt the Pope as 
the supreme head of the church. On that occasion the court of 
Rome did not require that the Abyssinian ceremonies, which were 
quite different from those of Rome, should be changed. The 
Pope received the ambassador from the emperor of Abyssinia ; 
and the pope's secretary declared, that the said emperor should 
always be considered as the true son of his hoUness. Never- 
theless, the Abysinians at that time were Eutychians — they cir- 
cumcised their children ; they observed the Jewish sabbath ; 
they communicated under two kinds — they did not believe in 
the absolute necessity of baptism, and rejected the seven sacra- 
ments. — ** Francis Alvarez, his description of Ethiopia." 

The Maronites were also united to the church of Rome, 
because they acknowledged the Pope's supremacy ; still they 
retained all their own ceremonies, which they performed in thei/ 
>wn language. — (See the observations subjoined by Rich. Simon, 
D his French translation of the Italian Jesuit Dandini's Voyagf 
o Mount Libanus, pubUshed in 12mo. at Paris. See also Euseb 
Renaudot, Historia Patriarch, Alexand. p. 548.) 



THE PROTES.TANV CHURCHES. 297 

i«urther; I charge Mr. Mi guire himself, with holding prin- 
tMcs contrary to his own <?hjrch. First, he says, that Protejs 
tants are nol heretics. I reply, that hi» church describes all 
who are out of her pale, as ** infidels, heretics, and excommuni- 
cated persons." Dr. French, a Roman Catholic bishop of 
Ferns, in his " Doleful Fall of Andrew Sail," says, that the 
church of England, both priests and people, as well secundum 
prcEsentem as secundum fuiur am justiliam^ are out of the n)ystical 
ark of Christ. Dr. O'Reilly, in his catechism, says, that it is 
necesary for the soul, on pain of damnation, to be obedient to 
the see of Rome. Does Mr. Maguire, by opposing this doc- 
trine, exempUfy the unity of the system ? Mr. Maguire has 
this day contradicted the principle which he laid down before — 
namely, that it was sufficient for the churches in communion with 
Rome to agree in essentials, though not in non-essentials : and 
we are now informed, that there is no such distinction. The 
church of Rome holds that the scriptures are to be interpreted 
" secundum sensum quem tenet ecciesia, et unanimem consen- 
sum patrum," according to the opinion of the church, and the 
unanimous consent of the Fathers, in matters ol faith and 
morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine "in 
rebus fidei et morum ad Christianse doctrinse jedificationeir 
pertinentibus." 

As to the anathema being annexed to none but to articles c 
faith, I refer to the 4th session of the council of Trent : 

" It shall be lawful for none to print, or cause to be printed, any books on 
sacred subjects, without the name of the author, or for the future to sell them, 
or even to keep them, except they be first examined and approved of by thf 
Ordinary, under fain of an anathema^ 

I should like to know, was the matter thus prohibited an arti- 
cle of faith 1 Again, in the 27th canon of the 3d council of La 
teran, it is said, 

" Therefore, we are resolved to subject to anathema all who shall presume 
to receive or shelter in their houses or lands those who are called Puritans 
Patrins, or Publicans." 

I should like to know, whether this injunction rolated to b 
matter of faith ? My friend, in the distinction wh^ch he has 
drawn, has contradicted the assembly of Jerusalem, which Mr. 
Maguire called the great exemplar of councils. That assembly 
made no decree on matters of faith ^ as may be seen by consultmg 
!he 15th of Acts. Mr. Maguire has referred to some cases of 
fanaticism. You have doubtless heard of the revelations of 
Sister Nativite. I shall give you one of her revelations- A 
message with which, she said, she was charged from heaven to 
deliver, Mas, that her sister nuns should leave off wearing lin^n 
chemises, and wiear flannel ones again, in conformity to thfl 



298 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

rule of their order ! These revelations are the production ot 
which Dr. Milner said, 

" 1 cannot speak too highly of the sublimity and affecting piety of tlies^ 
revelations in general." — See Revelations de la Sceur Nativite. Paris, 1817, 

This is the work of which an English Jesuit of our own da\ 
has observed, that if the whole scriptures were lost, all thei. 
most valuable moral, doctrinal, and theological science migh'. 
be recovered here, and with interest ! ! 

Did Mr. Maguire never read of the Feast of the Ass, thai 
was celebrated in several churches and cathedrals in France, it: 
the 15th century? The gross absurdities then practised wouk 
exceed belief, were they not recorded by faithful witnesses. A 
young woman richly dressed, with an infant in her arms, wa& 
placed on an ass, and led in great ceremony to the altar, where 
high mass was performed ; and a hymn, replete with blasphemy, 
was sung in his praise by the whole congregation : and what is 
still more remarkable for its folly and profanation, the priest 
used at the conclusion of the ceremony, as a substitution of the 
words with which he dismiss.ed the people, to bray three times 
like an ass, which was answered by three simular brays by all 
the people. We have heard a good deal about Johanna South- 
cote. Did Mr. Maguire never hear that the founder of the 
order of preaching friars, founded also, in 121 6, an order ot 
preaching sisters. There is, however, this great distinction 
between the Protestants and the Roman Catholic church, — Pro- 
testants reject all such fanatics as Johanna Southcote ; the 
\:hurch of Rome does not. Has Mr. Maguire not heard of St. 
Teresa de Jesus? There is a collection of sermons written in 
Spanish, by Francis Fernando De Lara y Yillamayor, of the 
order of our Lady of Mount Carmel : and this book is approved 
of by the general of his order, and also by the doctors of the 
university of Alcala, and by his bishop, and by the king of 
Spain's secretary ; in which there are three sermons in eulogy 
of the seraphic mother St. Teresa. In one of the discourses 
the preacher informs us, how this blessed woman became the 
only female doctor that ever was in the Catholic church ; and 
in order that she might obtain that honour, and as the doctors 
of Salamanca hesitated about admitting a female to the honoui 
of the doctorate, he relates that her chin was endowed with a 
iong beard, and that the learned men of that university, seeing 
this phenomenon, no longer hesitated to give her the degree. 

"And thus, (says the preacher,) though by nature she was a woman, yet 
ill prowess and by virtue of her beard she was a man, and that one of ihi 
Siost bearded man that ever graduated in that seat of learning." 

The learned preacher then goes on to prove from sci ipturei 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 299 

flmt Solomon had St. Teresa in his contemplation in the 31st 
rtiapter of Proverbs, " who can find a virtuous wormian.'* 

** Mulierem fortem quis inveniet — quien hallara una muger fuerte, Val- 
^ame Dios! tan dificil es ballar una muger fuerte? Si; que no es muger 
merte como querra de la que habla la letra — seno una muger que siendo 
fuerte, fuesse santa, y buena, Mulierem bonam, leyo el Caldeo — Mulierem 
omni virtute cumulatam, leyeron otras, una muger con todas las vertudes 
udornada — Mulierem audacem ad res genendas, leyo Baino una, muo^e; 
audaz para todas las impresas — Mulierem heroinam Leyeron otros, una mu< 
ger heroo excellentessimo. Mulierem virilem, leyeron los Setenta: i?ni 
muger varon en lo varonil mulierem masculam, leyo Vatablo una mugei 
Macho que explica mas que varon porque explica hombre mui barbado, 
Essa es la muger que pregunta Solomon ? pues mui bien dice, que quien la 
lallara ? quis inveniet porque muger y con tantas prendas es mui dificil de 
encontrar, Mulierem fortem quis inveniet." 

The preacher then goes on to ask in an animated style, 
who is this woman that Solomon has foretold should be found 
m the church ? 

"I will tell you, (says be,) since I know what answer heaven has given 
to the question : for on a certain day while the canonization of the Senora 
doctress was pending, as one of the sisters of our lady of Mount Carmcl was 
wrapt in contemplation of all the praises the church had lavished on this its 
glorious saint, and as she looked up to heaven she saw a piece of writing fall 
from the skies at her feet; and taking it up, she read therein, 'Christ has 
formed for himself a brave woman.' Then the daughter of our lady of Mount 
Carmel cried out,' O sisters, our holy mother is the stout mother of the church. 
O lady and doctress, it well becomes you; our Mount Carmel indeed en- 
joys the riches of possessing a mother of such prowess — the university of 
Salamanca enjoys the glory of having you as a graduated doctress in its 
schools ; our own Spain rejoices in having a Spanish woman such a Spanish 
man in prowess ; and the whole church glories in having a woman with & 
beard. — Mulierem Virilem, Mulierem Masculam.' " 

You shall now have a specimen of the divinity of St. Anthony. 
On the text Matt, xi, " Take my yoke upon you, &c," he 
begins his sermon with this question — " What! are the Apos- 
tles then oxen ?" And the most of his discourse is to show, 
that the Apostles were oxen ; for seven reasons, some of which 
are these, — 

" Because the Apostles were sent by pairs, like oxen. Acts 13, * Sep- 
arate to me Saul and Barnabas,' &c. 2. Because an ox is a strong and 
laborious animal : so St. Paul says, "* He laboured more abundantly than 
they all.' 3. An ox spends little, though it labours much : and one of ths 
Apostles says, 1 Tim. 6, 'Having food and raiment, let us therewith be con- 
tent:' but some prelates m our time are palfreys, that spend much, and labour 
little. 4. Because an ox has two horns ; and that which answers in the 
Apostles to these two horns, is doctrine and life. Hence that preacher ia 
an unicorn, who has but one of these ; with this horn preachers ought to 
blow, that is, with good doctrine in preaching; which yet often profits little, 
mless it be accompanied with the other horn, that is, good life. Another 
eason is because there is nothing in an ox unprofitable; so neither in the 
life of the Apostles.— Of ^.he hide of the one, shoes are made, and from the 
eonversation of the Apostles, an example is taken, which fortifies the afiec' 
tions, as a shoe does the feet : Cant. 7, * How beautiful are thy goings u 
BJiuets. '* Cwrm. J^. de A post p. 428 



500 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

in the concluding passage are expressions, which I cmmfif 
read. 

My friend knows something of the Breviary of his church. 
It contains some most exf.ravagant narratives, For instance 
we read of St. Cecilia, a martyr, that when tire axe was em- 
ployed, the executioner in vain endeavoured to sever the deli- 
cate neck of his victim ; which, being but half divided, allowed 
her to Uve for three days, at the end of which she died ! 

Again — His holiness travelling to Corinth, and being in wan! 
of a safe horse, borrowed one which the lady of a certain noble- 
man used to ride. The animal carried the Pope with the great- 
est gentleness, and when the journey was finished, was sent 
back to his mistress : but in vain did tlie lady attempt to enjoy 
the wonted services of her favourite steed. The horse had 
become unmanageable, and gave the lady many an indecorous 
fall, " as if (says the Breviary,) feeling indignant at having to 
carry a woman, since the vicar of Christ had been on his back." 
The horse was in consequence presented to the Pope, worthy 
only of such a rider. Brev. Rom. die 27 Maii. 

This, gentlemen, is the Breviary of the Roman Catholic 
church, compiled in obedience to a decree of the council of 
Trent. Pope Pius V, having ordered a number of learned and 
able men to prepare it, sanctioned it by his bull guod a nobis, 
July 1566, and commanded the clergy of the Roman Catholic 
church all over the world to make use of it. I could also read 
an account of a strange composition, called the Eternal Gospel, 
" Evangelium iEternum ;" but time does not permit. 

In the conclusion of this important discussion, I beg to remind 
my friend about the passage from Sir Edwin Sandys, and the 
application of the term tegevg in the New Testament. A gen- 
rleman seemed to insinuate, that I received assistance in this 
meeting — I can truly deny the charge. Can I say the same for 
my opponent ? He on the first day was not able to take notes, 
but notes were taken for him. Hear me, gentlemen ; I hold in 
my hand the document. Thereon is written, 

7th. As to the the Editions of the Scriptures. What Bible am I to take 
as authentic ? 

Obs. — How this acts powerfully in proof of the necessity of a li\ino es 
positor to check all typographical errors as well as others. 

9th. As to the Salt of the earth — denies the chemistry — immaterial. 

10th. The Lord is the one shepherd. 

Obs. — On this what a disjointed fold — and — Obs. — The phrase is, On«j 
fold, and one Shepherd. 

" Litera Scripta manet." When I was going away, 1 hap- 
pened to find this document left on the table, and put it amongst 
my papers, and afterwards discovered that it contained the hints 
which I have noticed. Will my opponent say, that he has re 



THE PROTLa'TANT CHURCHES. 301 

eeived no assistance in this very room, when a gentleman, who 
ihall be here nameless, furnished such suggestions to him. His 
remark about the salt was, perhaps, the strongest point which he 
made, and this presents itself in the notes before us. 

He says he quoted a passage, by which my ignorance of 
scripture was exposed. Pardon me for here remarking that I 
nave read at least the Douay Testament with some attention, 
for the purpose of making a comparison between it and the 
authorized version. The passage to which Mr. Maguire has 
refered is — 

'*No man knoweth whether he be worthy of love or hatred." Ecclea- 
astes, ix, 1. 

The Protestant version reads, 

" No man knoweth either hate or love." 

I asK any man to compare this Douay translation with the 
Protestant version, and he will discover the difference to be so 
great, as considerably to change the sense. Let both be com- 
pared with the original, and I will venture to say that the Pro- 
t€'stant version is correct. 

Mr. Maguire called upon Mr. Pope to read the rest of the 



Mr. Pope observed, I cannot occupy my time in doing so. 

We are drawing to the termination of the discussion. 1 have 
brought forward fair and undeniable facts, showing that the 
church of Rome is often opposed to the church of Rome, doctor 
against doctor. Pope against Pope, in proof that the unity, boas- 
ted of, does not exist, and that the church of Rome is not infal- 
ible. If, as I have proved, the church of Rome contradicts 
herself, inasmuch as two contradictions cannot be true — the 
church of Rome cannot be infalhble. Her infallibility there- 
fore goes to the ground, and all the superstructure raised upon 
it. Nor is this all. This pretension to infallibility is the mill- 
stone about her neck, which, though, " she sit as a queen upon 
the waters," will sink her into the abyss. Her doctrine mus^ 
be brought to the test of revelation, and the right of private 
judgment must be recognized. My friend has himself departed 
from the system of the church of Rome, and has brought her 
principles to the bar of private judgment, and thereby given a 
practical proof of the unity which exists in the church of Rome. 

I received yesterday even'ng a letter from the Rev. Prince 
Crawford, Curate of St. Mary's, Donnybrook ; peimit me to 
read it : 

"Dear Sir. — Having read in the public papers a report of the controversy 
it present pending between you and Mr Maguire, in which he in a most 

26 



THE WANT OF UNITY OF 

decided manner denies that he uttered any thing, at the Carrick meeting 
which could be considered as a challenge, I beg to stale that through acci- 
dental circumstances I met the gentleman who reported the proceedings of 
that meeting, that he expressed considerable surprise at Mr. Maguire's denial, 
and in the most unequivocal manner, declared, that after the meeting was 
over, he (the reporter) retired to the hotel, for the purpose of arrancring hia 
notes ; that while so engaged, Mr. Maguire entered the room, when the 
reporter observed to him, that he had now brought Mr Pope on his back, aa 
he had given a direct challenge to him, and that a meeting was unavoidable. 
That then the reporter read his notes as they have appeared in print, when 
Mr. Maguire acknowlHged them to be a faithful statement of his words, and 
added that what he had said he would stand to, and that though all the sons 
of Adam were congregated against him, he would not fear them. The re- 
porter's name is -. And as I am an advocate for truth, you have every 

permission to use this document as you may think proper. 

I remain, dear Sir, your's very faithfully 
•*Privce Crawford, Curate of St Mary's Donnybrook." 

My correspondent mentions the name of the reporter. I fee' 
it unnecessary to give it on this public occasion. My friends, 
you can determine whether a system, which has recourse to such 
expedients to support itself, can be from God. And here I beg 
leave to notice an assertion of Mr. Eneas M'Donnell, made to 
two gentlemen, whose names can be given — " that at Ballipas- 
loe, after a policeman had run his bayonet into McDonnell's leg, 
I cheered him to go on." The whole is false. I did not stir 
from my place, and would willingly have prevented, as far as 
my ability m^ght have enabled me, the police from doing an 
injury to any Roman Catholic, if such had been intended. In 
reference to Cavan, you have read in the public prints the 
various contradictions of statements put forward by ecclesiastics 
of the church of Rome. Now I ask you as honest men, can 
that system have proceeded from the God of truth, which has 
recourse to such manoeuvring, and adopts principles of action 
so contradictory to the tenor of the holy v/rit ? 

Mr. Maguire. — I imagined after Mr. Pope had apologized 
for the intolerable language which he made use of yesterday — I 
thought that after apologizing in the presence of that God whose 
uame he so often invokes, he would not have indulged in similar 
irascib'hty, and that we should not have had from him another 
display of the spleen. I appeal to the meeting, to say whether 
I have not conducted myself with good temper towards Mr. 
Pope during this discussion — I appeal to the meetmg, if I have 
betrayed the same irascibility towards him. Mr. Pope brought 
forward a document to prove that I had received assistance 
duripg this discussion, and that suggestions were handed to me 
by a gentleman uhom it was unnecessary for him to name. A 
tingle observation will set you right on the subject. I neglected 
fw the first day of this discussion to take notes I thought my 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 503 

memory would preserve the heads of the arguments advanced 
Some notes were taken for me by Mr. O'Connell — but I declare 
solemnly that 1 never saw a line or syllable of the document 
now produced by Mr. Pope. I never got a hint about the 
argument on the salt of the earth. Though I do not imagine 
myself a great scholar, I do not think there are many at this 
meeting who knew moie of that particular point than I did 
nyself. Mr. Pope has acknowledged that it was one of the 
best hits which I made against him. It Avas he himself who 
introduced the subject. I am sorry that Mr. Pope will not allow 
this meeting to pass over with the regularity which distinguished 
it from the commencement, but that a drop of the poisoned 
chalice must be infused into our good humour. With regard 
to the reporter of the meeting at Carrick-on-Shannon, I repeat 
what I have already publicly stated in the newspapers, and J ara 
satisfied to abide the result, that I never authorized the report in 
question, and that I had no communication with the person who 
reported the proceedings of that meeting. I knew when I made 
this statement at the commencement of this discussion, that 
there were many persons in Carrick-on-Shannon, who would be 
glad to detect me in stating what was not the fact. I now 
appeal, with confidence, to the Protestants who were present at 
the meeting in Carrick-on-Shannon,' whether my statement be 
not correct. The fact is, that save during that meeting, I have 
never seen the reporter, except when coming to Dublin on the 
outside of the Longford coach. And I here declare that, in the 
presence of four Protestants the challenge of Mr. Pope was put 
into my hands. I now return to the subject of our discussion ; 
1 repeatedly called upon Mr. Pope to show from scripture a 
distinction between essentials and non-essentials. I have already 
proved to you, that in the passage quoted from St. Paul, there 
was no difference made between doctrine and discipline, but 
that the disputes amongst the people relative to the superiority 
of their preachers, formed a breach of charity which the Apostle 
would not tolerate. Mr. Pope says that Peter denied Christ, 
and upon this fact he argues tL vt Peter could not be infallible; 
but he makes no distinction between the commission of sin, and 
a breach of divine faith. Christ says to Peter — 

'-* Siirton, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift 
you as wheat. But 1 have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not ; and tjiou 
being once converted, confirm thy brethren." 

That is when converted from the sin which he had committed* 
he was to confirm his brethren. Here our Saviour tells us that 
the faith of Peter should not fail. Now, either Peter's faith 
failed, or it did not — if it failed, we must suppose that the prayef 
of our Saviour to his heavenly Father was inefficacious Mj 



804 THE WANT OF l3NiTY OF 

friend has reminded me of Theodoret. I re-assert, that iii the 
quotation* read by Mr. Pope from Theodoret, the word '' vene- 
rate" is substituted for the word "adore" — what is the facti 
Theodoret wrote four books against the Eutychians, who denied 
the reuhty of the human nature in Christ, in which he introducei 
two persons under the names of Orthodoxus and Erranistes, 
who m'zt'jaWy discuss the subject — the first is the CathoUc 
believer — the second the Eutychian advocate. In the first 
dialogue the reahty of Christ's presence in the Euchaiist, other- 
wise the doctrine of transubstantiation, had been established ; 
bat in the second the subject is resumed, and the change of the 
bread and wine distinctly pointed out — the first question is put 
by Orthodoxus. He asks Erranistes : — 

Orthodox. — "Tell me now; the mystical symbols which are ofiered tc 
God by the priests of what are they the symbols ?" 

Erranistes. — "Of the body and blood op the Lord." 

Or.—" Of his true body or not?" 

Err. — " Of his true body." 

Or. — ** Very well ; for every image must have its original/' 

Err. — *' I am happy you have mentioned the divine mysteries : tell me^ 
therefore, what you do call the gift that is offered before the Priest's invo« 
cation ?" 

Or. — " This must not be said openly, for some may be present who are not 
initiated." 

Err. — " Answer then in hidden terms." 

Or. — " We call it an aliment of certain grains," 

Err. — " And how do you call the other symbols ?" 

Or. — " We give it a name that denotes a certain beverage." 

Err. — " And after the consecration what are they called ?" 

Or.—" The body of Christ, and the blood of Christ." 

Err. — " fiera 6tye rov ayeacfiov. 

Or. — " <ra)//tt •)(^piOTov^ Kai aifia ^piarov. 

Err. — " And you believe that you partake of the body and blood of Christ !»' 

Or.—" So I believe." 

Err. — " As the symbols then of the body and blood of Christ were different 
before the consecration of the Priest, and after that consecration are changed, 
m the same manner we (Eutychians) say the body of Christ after his ascen- 
sion was changed into the divine essence." 

Or. — "Thou art taken in thine own net; for after the consecration tht 
mystical symbols lose not their proper nature ; they remain in the former 
substance, figure, and appearance, (or as some translate it, in the shape and 
form of the former substance,) to be sean and understood to be wliat they 
have been made ; this they are believed to be ; and as such they are adored." 

Thus Theodoret turned the comparison of Eutyches (who be- 
heved in transubstantiation) against himself — viz : that as the 
elements of bread and wine remained after consecration so as 
to be seen and felt — that is, as far as the senses were con- 
cerned ; so Christ's humanity did remain after its hypostaticai 
union with his divinity. 

* Mr. Pope begs to say, with Mr. Magwre's concurrence, that he gave the passaff 
Nwa; Theodoret, as he found it translated in Faber's ' Difficulties of Romaniism."- 
toBd. 1836, p. 141. 



THE PRoTESTANr CHURCHES. 305 

With resfuect to the council of Ephesus having decreed, tnat 
nothing should be added to what had been determined upon bj 
the council of Nice, I agree that it did so. But will it be said 
that when other articles, besides those noticed in the council of 
Nice, happened to be denied bv heretics, that such aiticlea 
should not be determined and explained by other and succeed- 
ing councils? According to the same line of argument, as the 
i^ord consubstantial was not mentioned at the council of Jeru- 
salem, the Arians might have argued, that it should not be 
ntroduced at the council of Nice. The council of Ephesua 
only meant that nothing was to be added to what had been com- 
manded by our Saviour, and handed down to us by the Apostles. 
Mr. Pope says, it would be direct idolatry in the Catholics to 
adore the host, as it may happen not to be consecrated. I will 
read to you the opinion of no less a man than the celebrated 
Protestant divine, Dr. Thorndyke, on the subject : 

" Will any Papist acknowledge that he honours the elements of the Eu- 
charist for God ? Will common sense charge him with honouring that in 

the sacrament which he does not believe to be there? Those who say 

that Papists, by worshipping the host, are guilty of idolatry, only lead Pro- 
testants by the nosf? 

But when the ancient idolaters prayed to Baal and their idols, 
{simulacra^ dumb things, as they are called in holy writ) prove 
to me that they only intended to worship God, and not the idols 
themselves, when they offered up adoration to them, and I shal 
give up the argument. Let Mr. Pope show, if he can, by propei 
documents, that I have contradicted Catholic doctrine, and let 
him not stand up here to attack that which he does not under- 
stand. I could quote thirty Protestant writers to disprove the 
charge of idolatry against the Roman Catholic church, showing, 
that even if the elements of the sacrament do not undergo a 
transubstantiation. Catholics are not guilty of idolatry, as their 
worship is directed to Christ, into whose body and blood they 
b^)lieve the elements have been transubstantiated. I have here 
the dialogue of Theodoret, and I shall repeat his words — 

Orthodox. — " Tell me of what are the mystical symbols offered to God 
by the Priest ?" 

Erranisies. — " Of the body and blood of the Lord." 

Or. — " Of his true body or not ?" 

Err. — "Of his true body." 

Or. — " Very well ; for every image must have its originaL** 

Err. — " And after the consecration what are they called?" 

Or.— '-The body of Christ, and the blood of Christ." 

Again, he asserts that I said, that the Catholics are agreed 
only in essentials, and that I confined my statement to that. 1 
deny the assertion--! publicly said, that even in discipline thej^ 
are not alKwed to disagree, for the smaller the cause of disputf 
(he gi eater would be the scandal, because the less justifiable. 

26* 



S06 THE WANT OF UNITY CF 

Mr. Pope hay quoted Dr. Milner. When he can protiuce I 
passage from the great Dr. Milner opposed to any point oi 
Catholic doctrine, he will be an extraordinary man indeed. He 
also gave us a quotation from a second Blanco White. I appeal 
to this meeting whether it be fair to produce those men as wit- 
nesses against the Catholic church, who have apostatized from 
her communion, and who, in order to justify their apostasy, 
endeavour to blacken the church which they have deserted, in 
every possible way — men who endeavour to exhibit her as the 
scarlet lady of the seven hills, and her visible head as anti-christ? 
By-the-bye, the latter elegant phrases are not so much in vogue 
at the present day, nor so frequently employed against the 
Catholic church as they were in the days of the reformers. It 
is wonderful to see how people will retrace their steps. In the 
early English Protestant translations of the Bible, congregation 
was used for the word churchy and elder for bishop. But when 
the Protestants got possession of the tithes and green acres, 
church and bishop were restored in the Bible. Is it not very 
foolish, to say the least of it, for Mr. Pope to go over all the 
antiquated stories which he is enabled to collect from the 
patnphlets of such men as Gideon Ousley, and to bring forward 
such new-lights as authopities against the Catholic church ? I 
could have quoted a passage from the Rev. Sydney Smith, 
worth all the arguments which he could produce, relative to the 
persecutions which the Catholics suffered from the early re- 
formers ; but I have not, throughout this discussion, made any 
appeal to the feelings of my Catholic auditors, and I shall not 
do so now. 

Mr. Pope talked of St. Teresa, and related some wonderful 
stories about her long beard. I suppose he would have us con- 
clude, that because St. Teresa was long bearded, the Catholic 
religion cannot be true. I deny the authority which he has 
quoted. I refer him to the Hfe of St. Teresa, as given in the 
Lives of the Saints, by Alban Butler — he will not find recorded 
there the ridiculous stories which he has retailed to us. He 
acknowledges that he did not know that there was such a text 
in the Douay Bible is *' No man knoweth whether he be worthy 
of love or hatred." Did ha not tell us that he had carefully 
compared the two translations, and did he not describe the Vul* 
gate as scaturientem erroribus? 

He now acknowledges his ignorance of the existence of Ihia 
text in the Douay Bible. Now the version given of this text in 
the Douay Bible differs not materially nor substantially from thai 
given of it in the Protestant translation. It is the»f rendered 

^ Man know»-«b not lov« or hatred by all that is beSofif him." 



THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 807 

Hear the next verse — 

•*But all things are kept uncertain for the time to coAio, because all thingf 
tqnally happen to the just and to the wicked, to the good and to the evil, to 
the clean and to the unclean," &c. 

There is I contend in these passages, no npiterial differencea 
between the Protestant version and the Douay Bible. Mr. Pope 
has showed his ignorance of the solemn expression always used 
by a general council in defining articles of faith, and he con- 
founds with it the formula of an excommunication. When an 
article of faith is declared by a general council, it is solemnly 
decreed, " Si quis dixerit ; if any one shall contradict this 
anathema sit." But where that formulary is not employed, and 
the mere excommunication pronounced, it does not regard mat- 
ters of faith. Had Mr. Pope consulted Delahogue, with whose 
work he pretends to be so intimately acquainted, he would ftiid 
the phrase, si qnis dixerit, is never employed by a general 
council, but when an article of faith is defined. I should be 
sorry that any personal differences should exist between me and 
my friend, Mr. Pope. I declare that I have no feelings towards 
him, but those of a Christian, a brother, and a gentleman ; and 
that I shall never hear him spoken of disrespectfully without 
defending his character. I trust that I shall never entertain any 
other towards him. I will say, and it is as far as I can go, that 
no man ever maintained his opinions more ingeniously, or set 
up a more plausible defence. It was to me a cause of regret 
that the interrogatory system had not been adopted in this dis- 
cussion, as I would then have had an opportunity of taking Mr. 
Pope's arguments seriatim, point by point, and of unravelling 
his sophisms. Mr. Pope talked of the Catholic church having 
fallen into error, and yet he admits that this erroneous church 
has been suffered to exist for eighteen hundred years. This 
gentleman really appears to have acquired more confidence 
after his six or seven years preaching, than the whole Catholic 
church for eighteen hundred years. It has long been the cus- 
tom of the reformers, and of those who were gifted with interna) 
illumination, to talk of the scarlet lady, seated upon the seven 
hills. How could a church have thus subsisted for eighteen 
centuries, if error had formed its corner stone and foundation ? 
Have we ever read or heard of any system either in politics, or 
in religion, lasting for such a period of time, unless it was 
foanded upon the best principles 1 

I may now mention that I put seven queries to Mr. Pope to 
any one of v/hich he has not returned even the semblance of an 
answer. I asked him why he believed that all truths are con- 
tained in the scripture ; I then inc juired from him by wha* 
iuthoray the sign of the cross was employed in baptism ? I 



508 THE WANT OF UNIT? uF 

askeJ him why he used blood — though, indeed, he had endea- 
voured to draw a distinction between the red gravy whicri fiowg 
from a shoulder of mutton, and the blood — (of the particles of 
which that gravy is most unquestionably composed. ) [ confess 
myself unable to understand his metaphysical distinction. Per- 
haps he goes upon the maxim that odta sunt resiringenda, I 
called upon him to show why he did not wash the feet cf his 
neii^hbours ; Peter, we know, oaid to Christ : '* Lord, thou shaii! 
uot wash my feet" — our Saviour repUed : " If I wash thee not, 
thou shalt have no part with me." I called upon Mr. Pope to 
prove the procession of the Holy Ghost, from the scripture? I 
called upon him to show where the term " consuhstantiaV^ was 
employed in scripture ? I called upon him to show where the 
baptism of infants was authorized by scripture. I demanded an 
answer to these several queries. He has certainly evaded them. 
Judge, candid and enlightened Protestants, if he has quoted as 
many texts of scripture as I have. There is not an article of 
my belief in support of which I did not adduce clear and most 
manifest texts of scripture. Has Mr. Pope done so ? He hag 
quoted some texts of scripture against me, but not one to esta- 
bhsh his oxon rule of faith. He thought proper to substitute foi 
the word of God, the faUible interpretation of man — to appeal 
from the direct evidence of scripture, to the obscure and glim- 
mering light of private judgment. Beware of following such an 
ignis fatuuSj when the meridian sun is before you — it wiJl lead 
you into marshes and the habitations of error — it will never 
conduct you to the fountain of truth. 1 have quoted the opin- 
ions of the holy Fathers, and I am bold to say, that I prefer their 
opinions to the single opinion of Mr. Pope. I have read to you 
the opinion of St. Augustin, who declares that he " would not 
believe the four gospels if the authority of the Catholic church 
did not move him thereto. This recalls to my mind the saying 
of St. Cyprian, that he has not God for his Father who has not 
the Church for his mother. This Mr. Pope asserts was applied 
to Pope Stephen. The work of Cyprian lies here on the table, 
and I challenge Mr. Pope to read twenty lines of the page in 
which this passage occurs, and then to maintain nis opinion as 
before. The passage of St. Cyprian has been misrepresented 
by my friend. Again, I called upon him to answer the objections 
of the Socinian, without manifestly contradicting the principlen 
of private judgment. Reason is on the side of the Sociniswa; 
and mysteries being above reason^ he has a better right to exer- 
cise his private judgment than Mr. Pope, of which be it observed, 
Mr. Pope cannot claim a monopoly. I would answer the Soci- 
nian by the authority of a church which hat5 existed for eighteen 
jndred years. If he would not believe ih that authority, I, -dt 



THE PROTECTANT CHURCHES. 801 

all eve/its, v ould not rontradict myself, as I would not concede 
to hin the right of private jiidgment. Not so Mr. Pope. The 
very fact of his pressing his interpretation upon the Socinian 
contradicts the principles of private judgment, as he thus endea 
vours to make a monopoly of that which he himself describes as 
the gift of heaven. 

I defied Mr. Pope to shov/ how a Protestant according to hia 
principles could make an act of faith. He has not done so. I 
admit the exercise of private judgment in discovering the ma.ka 
of the true church, but the moment the inquirer has made that 
discovery, that instant all difficulties are cleared aw^ay — all 
t'bjections vanish — and he is enabled to laugh to scorn t*he 
quibbles of the Atheist, the Deist, and the unbeliever. Talk 
Df internal evidence, indeed — why you might as well tell the 
Pagan that 2 and 2 make 6 — he can never make the discovery. 
i never could make the discovery. Millions upon millions of 
( hristians have lived and died without ever discovering this 
internal illumination of which Mr. Pope has so coniidently 
spoken. The Catholic church rejects this ignus fatuus, and 
with equal justice and wisdom she discards and condemns the 
principle of private judgment. According to that principle, as 
I have already shown, it would be impossible to establish by 
clear and unexceptionable argument, the authority, the integrity^ 
and the inspiration of the sacred scriptures. 



Here the Discussion ended. When Mr. Maguire had taken his seat Mr. 
Pope rose and shook him by the hand, which was cordially returned by Mr, 
Maguire. 

Mr. Pope then stated to the meeting, that he had that moment been in- 
formed by Admiral Oliver that the notes and suggestions of which he, Mr. 
Pope, had spoken, though taken down, had not been seen by Mr. Maguireii 



Counsellor Clinch declined to give an opinion touching the word uptv^, 
Mr. Pope added to the Report this note ; — " I beg to say, in reference tc 
the statement concerning Stephen, that Cyprian strongly reprehends him ai 
* endeavouring to assert the cause of heretics against the church of God,' but 
applies the u'^rds * he has not God,' &c. to the heretics of whom he speaks, 
and not to him. Cyprian. — Oper. Ep. 74. ad Pompeium. Oxford, 1682. 

"Richard T. P. Pope.'' 
Mr. Maguire added the following : — " In the description of the council of 
Baai\ the Ariajis who disturbed the council of Rimini, are mentioned throa^^,h 
tiistdke, T. Maguirb.^' 



THE EN15, 



i, i>' i^ t,u> 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Jan. 2006 

PreservatiofiTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Dnve 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 

(7!?/i\ 770.9 1 1 1 



7X 



I^K n^^c 



UBHARY OF CONGRESS 




017 285 630 5 




